GIFT  OF 
MROIT  L.   SAPIRO 


THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 


MACMILLAN  &  CO.,  Limited 


THE  MACMILLAN  CO.  OF  CANADA.  Ltd. 

TORONTO 


•THE  PROPHETS  Ol 
ISRAEL. 

FROM  THE  EIGHTH  TO  THE  FIFTH 
CENTURY 

THEIR  FAITH  AND  THEIR  MESSAGE 


BY 
MOSES  BUTTENWIESER,   Ph.D. 

PROFESSOR   OF    BIBLICAL   EXEGESIS,  HEBREW    UNION 
COLLEGE,    CINCINNATI 


THE  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 
1914 

AU  riihis  ruertcd 


COPYKIGHT,  1914 

By  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY 
Set  up  and  electrotyped.      Published  January,  1914 


TO  MY  FRIEND  AND  COMRADE, 

"THE  WIFE  OF  MY  YOUTH," 

WHOSE  SHARE  IN  THIS  WORK  IS  GREATER  THAN  I 
CAN  ACKNOWLEDGE 


280802 


TABLE   OF  CONTENTS 

PACE 

Foreword:  Origin  and  Character  of  Egyptian  Prophetic  Litera- 
ture— Rise  of  Eschatology — Method  and  Scope xv 

BOOK  I 

THE   FAITH   OF   THE   PROPHETS 
PART  I 

Chapter  I 

GENERAL  SURVEY 

The  KejTiote  of  the  Prophetic  Preaching— The  Importance  of 

Jeremiah ^ 

Chapter  II 

THE  TEMPLE-SERMON   AND   THE  PERSECUTION   OF   JEREMIAH 
UNDER    JEHOJAKIM 

I    The  Originally  Component  Parts  of  the  Temple-Sermon;  its 

21 

Genumeness " 

2.  Jeremiah's  Trial  and  Conviction,  and  the  Law,  Deut.  XVIII, 

15-22,  Applying  to  the  Case ^4 

3.  Jeremiah's  Escape-The  Reading  of  his  Prophecies  by  Baruch  37 

4.  Chap.  XXV— Its  Origin  and  Purpose 46 

Note  on  the  Date  of  Jer.  XVII,  19-27 ^^ 

Chapter  III 

THE  PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  UNDER  ZEDEKIAH.  CRITICAL 
ANALYSIS  OF  CHAPS.  XXXVII,  XXXVIII,  XXXIV,  XXXII,  3^-5, 
XXI 

A.  The  Actual  Facts  of  the  Case ,' „' ' ' "  V     ^^ 

B.  Critical  Analysis  of  the  Prophecies  and  Biographical  Records 

of  the  Period • ^^ 

vii 


viii  TABLE  OF   CONTENTS 

PAGE 

1.  XXXVII,  17-21  and  XXXVIII,  14-27 SS 

(a)  XXXVIII,  14-27— The  Legendary  Account 56 

(b)  XXXVII,  17-21— The  Authentic  Record 62 

2.  XXXIV,  8-22  and  XXXVII,  1-16— XXXIV,  1-7,  XXXII, 

3-5,  XXI,  1-14  and  XXXVIII,  1-13 65 

(a)  The  Two  Deputations  from  Zedekiah  to  Jeremiah,  XXXV' II, 

3,  7a — XXI,  1-3 — Both  Accounts  Legendary 67 

(b)  The  Original  Beginning  of  the  Narrative,  XXXVIII,  1-13, 

and  the  Prophecy,  XXI,  4-14-    XXXIV,  1-7— XXXII, 
3-5 69 

(c)  XXXIV,  8-22  and  its  Original  Conclusion,  XXXVII,  7b-io 

—The  Original  Place  of  XXXVII,  4,  and  5 76 

Chapter  IV 

THE   CONFESSIONS   OF   JEREMIAH 

1 .  Their  Importance 80 

2.  The  Date  of  the  Confessions 81 

(a)  The  Date  of  XX,  7-11,  13 83 

(b)  The  Date  of  XI,  18-XII,  3a,  5-6 84 

(c)  The  Date  of  XVIII,  18-20 86 

3.  The  Completeness  of  the  Confessions  and  of  the  Prophetic 

Writings  in  General  from  a  Literary  Point  of  View 87 

4.  The  Peculiarity  of  Biblical  Style gi 

5.  Analysis  and  Interpretation  of  the  Confessions 95 

(a)  The  Confession,  XV,  10, 15-21  and  its  Sequel,  XVI,  1-9 ....     95 

(b)  The  Confession,  XVII,  5-10,  14-18  and  its  Originally  Com- 

ponent Parts,  IX,  22,  23,  X,  23,  24,  XVT,  19.    Their 
Original  Order 103 

(c)  The  Confession,  XI,  18-XII,  3a,  5-6 115 

(d)  The  Confession,  XX,  7-11,  13 121 

(e)  The  Confession,  XX,  14-18 127 

PART  II 
Chapter  I 

INTRODUCTORY 

Jeremiah  Could  not  Write 133 


TABLE  OF   CONTENTS  ix 

Chapter  II 

PAGE 

Inspiration  as  Opposed  to  Divination  or  Possession 138 

PART  III 

Chapter  I 

IIow  the  Prophetic  Utterances  Became  Literature 167 

Chapter  II 
The  Prophets  Believe  the  Doom  Inevitable 176 

Chapter  III 

Jeremiah's  View  of  the  Doom rjg 

1.  Chap.  XIII,  15-27 180 

2.  Chaps.  XIV,  1-13  (19-XV,  4),  XV,  5^ 184 

3.  Chap.  IV,  3-31 195 

4.  XXX\'I,  3-7.    Chaps.  XXV  and  XLV 204 

(a)  XXXVI,  3,7 204 

(b)  Chap.  XXV 206 

(c)  Chap.  XLV 207 

5.  Chap.  XVIII,  iff 208 

Ch.-u»ter  IV 

AMOS'   VIEW   OF   THE   DOOM 

1.  The  Dominant  Note  of  Amos'  Preaching — The  Certainty  of 

Judgment 211 

2.  Chap.  V,  1-17  (Reconstrued)  Corroborates  this  View 212 

3.  Identity  of  the  Written  with  the  Spoken  Prophecies 221 

4.  Chap.  VII,  1-9.    History  of  Amos'  Call — General  Plan  of  his 

Prophecies 222 

5.  Amos'  Prediction  of  Doom  Applies  to  the  Whole  Nation 225 

6.  Why  Amos  Delivered  his  Message  at  Beth-el 237 

Chapter  V 

HOSEA'S   view   of  the   doom — ESSENCE   OF  HOSEA'S 

preaching 

1.  The  Unity  of  Chaps.  I-III 240 

2.  The  Epilogue  XIV,  2-9,  Supplementary  to  the  Description  of 

His  Future  Hope  in  II,  16-25 ^44 


X  TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 

PAGE 

3.  Chap.  V,  isb-VI,  3 — Another  Exposition  of  his  Future  Hope  247 

4.  Note  on  the  Original  Order  of  Hos.  I-III  and  the  Original 

Place  of  II,  1-3 251 

Chapter  VI 
isaiah's  view  of  the  doom  and  his  attitude  toward 

THE  political   AFFAIRS   OF  THE   DAY 

1.  Opinions  of  Present  Day  Scholars 254 

2.  Isaiah's  Earliest  Prophecies 255 

(a)  The  Consecration  Vision 255 

(b)  His  Future  Hope— X,  21-23 258 

(c)  IX,  7-X,  4+V,  25b-3o 261 

3.  The  Prophecies  of  the  Following  Periods 265 

4.  The  Theories  Advanced  in  Explanation  of  Isaiah's  Alleged 

Change  of  View  Untenable 268 

5.  Isaiah's  Guiding  Principle — Faith 269 

6.  No  Discrepancy  in  Isaiah's  Prophecies 272 

(a)  X,  20,  24-27+XIV,  24-27.    A  Post-Exilic  Product 273 

(b)  X,  27C-34.    One  or  Two  Fragments — Irrelevant  to  the  Ques- 

tion at  Issue 275 

(c)  XIV,  28-32.    Another  Post-Exilic  Product 276 

(d)  XVII,  12-XVIII,  6.    A  Number  of  Fragments  which  Admit 

of  No  Conclusion 278 

(e)  XXIX,  sa-b,  7-8.    A  Fragment  or  More  Probably  an  Inter- 

polation     280 

(f)  XXXI,  5-9.    A  Conditional  Prediction 282 

(g)  X,  5-19.     God's  Ultimate  Reckoning  With  the  Assyrian 

World- Power 285 

7.  Isaiah's  Last  Prophecy — Chap.  XXII,  1-14 287 

R6sum6 293 

Micah's  View  of  the  Doom 297 

BOOK  II 

THE   MESSAGE   OF   THE   PROPHETS 
PART  I 

Introductory 301 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS  xi 

AMOS 

PACE 

Justice  and  Righteousness 302 

Spiritual  Religion  Versus  Ritualistic  Piety 308 

Righteousness  the  True  Foundation  of  Society 323 

Supplementary  Note 327 

Index  of  Scripture- Passages  Discussed  or  Interpreted 331 

Index  of  Subjects 341 

Grammatical  and  Lexicographical  Obser\'ations 349 


ABBREVIATIONS 


b. 

ben 

Diog.  L. 

Diogenes  Laertius 

Gcs.  Buhl,  Worterbuci 

Gescnius,     Hebraischcs     und     Aramaisches 

Handworterbuch,  bearbcitet  von  Buhl, 

14  und  15.    Auflagc 

Holmes  &  Parson 

VetusTestamentumGraecum.    Kd.   Holmes 

et  Parson,  1 798-1827 

K 

KclJiibh 

Kautzsch ' 

Kautzsch,   Die    Heilige    Schrift    des   Alien 

Testaments,  3.  Auflage 

Marti  HC 

Kurzer  Hand-Commentar  zum  Alten  Testa- 

ment, herausgegeben  von  K.  Marti 

Nowack  UK 

Handkommentar    zum    Alten    Testament, 

herausgegeben  von  W.  Nowack 

Pes. 

Pesitta 

SBOT 

The  Sacred  Books  of  the  Old  Testament,  ed. 

by  P.  Haupt 

J.  V. 

sub  voce 

Targ. 

Targum 

\-ulg. 

Vulgata 

ZATW 

Zeitschrift  fiir  die  Alttestamentliche  Wissen- 

schaft 

ZDMG 

Zeitschrift  der  Deutschen  Morgenlandischen 

Gescllschaft 

LXX 

Septuagint 

LXXK 

"          Codex  Sinaiticus 

LXXA 

Codex  Alexandrinus 

LXXQ 

"          Codex  Marchalianus 

6 

Theodotion 

FOREWORD 

There  is  perhaps,  at  the  present  day,  no  subject  of 
bibHcal  study  which  possesses  more  interest  for  the 
lay  public  than  Prophecy,  a  fact  which  must  be  most 
gratifying  to  writers  on  this  subject,  though  it  carries 
with  it  one  serious  difficulty.  For  there  is  also  proba- 
bly no  subject  of  biblical  study  which  engages  the 
attention  of  the  speciahsts  to  the  extent  that  Prophecy 
does;  and  a  presentation  which  would  fill  the  needs  of 
the  one  class  of  readers  would  hardly  meet  the  require- 
ments of  the  other. 

I  cannot  claim  to  have  solved  this  difficulty.  I  am 
aware  that  there  are  parts  of  the  present  volume  which 
the  lay  reader  may  prefer  to  pass  over,  and  that  there 
are  other  parts  which  may  seem  commonplace  to 
the  scholar,  but  I  beheve  that  this  is  almost  inevitable 
in  the  present  stage  of  biblical  criticism.  The  general 
reader  will  probably  find  the  first  and  the  last  chap- 
ter most  readable,  as  these  were  originally  lectures 
deHvered  before  a  lay  audience,  the  first  as  an  exposi- 
tion of  the  Faith  of  the  Prophets,  the  second  as  an 
exposition  of  their  Message.  These  lectures,  which 
were  deUvered  in  Albany,  N.  Y.  in  Januar>',  1910,  at  the 
request  of  my  friend  and  former  pupil,  Rev.  S.  H. 
Goldenson,  I  was  strongly  urged  to  publish  at  the 
time.  They  are  here  substantially  unchanged,  though 
the  second  has  been  necessarily  somewhat  enlarged. 
In  \'iew  of  the  fact  that  these  surveys  were  based  on  an 
interpretation  and  a  line  of  reasoning  which  are  in 
many  points  at  variance  with   those  of   the  many 


^  FOREWORD 

distinguished  scholars  who  have  written  on  the  subject 
of  prophecy,  it  would  have  been  vain  to  pubhsh  them 
without  gi^ng  the  scientific  basis  for  my  presentation 
This  last  I  have  essayed  to  do  in  the  present  volume, 
and  I  am  not  without  the  hope  that  the  studies  m- 
^otorat^d  herein  (which  have  grown  out  of  my 
lecTures  on  the  subject  at  the  Hebrew  Union  College 
during  the  past  fifteen  years),  may  on  some  point 
open  up  new  Unes  of  thought,  and  throw  a  new  hght 
on  certain  vital  questions  connected  with  Israektish 

^'St  chapter,  which  might  logically  have  been 
reserved  for  the  second  volume,  has  been  included  here 
in  order  that,  as  far  as  preexiHc  prophecy  is  concerned 
the  presentation  of  the  subject  in  this  first  volume 
might,  in  a  summary  sense  at  least,  be  complete. 

The  institution  of  prophecy,  whose  origin  lies  far 
back  in  the  primitive  stages  of  religious  development, 
was  common  to  all  the  religions  of  antiquity.  It  was 
indigenous  to  Israel,  even  as  to  the  other  nations  of  the 
Ancient  Orient,  whether  near  or  remote-  but  m  Israel 
there  arose  in  the  course  of  time  another  type,  he 
so-called  Uterary  or  spiritual  prophecy,  which  from  the 
very  outset  was  a  distinct  species,  in  pronounced 
opposition  to  the  popular,  primitive  prophecy.  It  is 
with  the  great  representatives  of  this  speafic  Israektish 
type  of  prophecy  and  with  their  importance  in  the 
history  of  religious  thought  that  the  present  work  is 

"''onrecent  years  the  uniqueness  and  originaUty  of  this 
Uterary  phase  of  prophecy  have  been  questioned  by 
various  writers,  in  view  of  the  discovery  of  a  number  of 
E=wtian  texts  which  have  been  claimed  to  show  a 


FOREWORD  xvii 

close  kinship  to  Old  Testament  Prophecy  and  which, 
accordingly,  have  been  regarded  as  the  model  and 
source  of  the  latter.  In  regard  to  that  text,  however, 
to  which  the  greatest  importance  has  been  attached 
(Papyrus  Leiden  344  redo,  dating  from  the  XIX 
Dynasty,  that  is  about  1300  B.  C),  A.  H.  Gardiner, 
by  his  edition  and  translation  of  the  complete  Papy- 
rus,^ has  proved  that  the  conclusions  drawn  from  it  by 
Eduard  ]\Icyer,  "Die  Israeliten  und  ihre  Nach- 
barstamme,"  (1906)  pp.  45ifT.,  and  others  are  without 
basis.  He  has  shown  that  no  part  of  the  Papyrus  has  a 
prophetic  character,  and  still  less  a  Messianic  outlook, 
not  even  the  part  originally  pubKshed  by  H.  O. 
Lange,  on  which  those  scholars  prematurely  based 
their  deductions  regarding  the  origin  of  Israelitish 
prophecy.  Gardiner's  conclusions,  it  may  be  well  to 
add,  have  been  fully  corroborated  by  another  dis- 
tinguished Eg>-ptologist,  A.  Wiedemann  (in  "Archiv 
fur  ReUgionswissenschaft,"  XIII,  1910,  pp.  349-351). 
Wiedemann  refers  also  to  the  second  of  these  texts, 
which  was  discovered  in  a  Papyrus  in  St.  Petersburg, 
and  which  dates  from  around  1900  B.  C,  and  very 
rightly  points  out  {ib.)  that  the  excerpt  published  of  it 
by  GolenischefT,-  and  the  duphcate  of  a  part  of  this 
text,  translated  by  Ranke  in  Gressmann,  "Altorien- 
talische  Texte  und  Bilder,"  I,  pp.  2o5f.,  are  altogether 
insufhcient  to  permit  any  positive  conclusions.  What 
remains  of  Egyptian  prophetic  literature  is  a  third 
group  of  texts,  which  date  either  from  the  Hellenistic 
or  the  Roman  period.     These  prophecies  have  been 

'  "  The  Admonitions  of  an  Egyptian  Sage."  From  a  Hieratic 
Papyrus  in  Leiden  (Papyrus  Leiden  344  recto).    Leipzig,  igog. 

Tn  Rccueil  de  Travatix  rclalifs  d  la  philologie  el  d  I'arclUologU 
egypliennes  el  assyrienncs,  XV,  1893,  pp.  89/. 


xviii  FOREWORD 

commonly  thought  to  go  back  to  Old-Egyptian  origi- 
nals, to  which  Wiedemann  cautiously  remarks  (ib.) 
that,  though  such  older  origin  is  possible,  it  cannot  at 
present  be  proved.    I  would  go  farther  than  Wiede- 
mann and  say  that  such  older  origin  is  out  of  the 
question.    There  is  nothing  to  support  such  a  theory 
except  the  claim  of  the  authors  of  these  prophecies, 
and  this  claim  should  be  judged  in  the  same  Hght  as 
the  similar  claims  met  with  in  apocal>ptic  literature, 
and,  it  may  be  added,  also  in  the  contemporaneous 
astrological  Hterature.     The  authors  simply  thought 
to  lend  their  predictions  greater  authority  by  labeling 
them   as  products  of  hoary   anriquity.     With   this 
characteristic    of    these    pseudonymous    prophecies, 
as  well  as  with  their  real  time  of  origin,  it  accords  that 
they  are  akin  in  their  character  and  contents,  not  to 
propheric  Hterature  proper,  but  to  apocalypric  litera- 
ture, the  oldest  Old  Testament  products  of  which 
date  from  the  close  of  the  Persian  and  the  beginning  of 
the  Hellenistic  period.    The  simultaneous  occurrence 
of  apocalyptic  texts  in  Egypt  and  in  postexihc  Juda- 
ism is,  in  all  probability,  to  be  accounted  for  by  the 
fact  that  the  rise  and  development  of  apocalyptic 
literature  goes  hand  in  hand  with  the  spread  and 
development   proper   of   astrological   hterature    (see 
p.  159,  n.  i).    As  a  matter  of  fact,  a  careful  examina- 
tion of  the  two  reveals  the  interesting  fact  that  there 
is  in  some  respects  a  very  close  relationship  between 
astrological  and  apocal>'ptic  literature,  a  relationship 
pointing  clearly  to  a  certain  dependence  of  the  latter 
on  the  former.    In  view  of  all  this,  I  saw  no  occasion 
for  referring  to  the  Egyptian  texts  in  the  body  of  the 
present  volume. 

By  the  foregoing  remarks  I  have  indirectly  indicated 


FOREWORD  xix 

my  position  also  to  the  view,  advanced  by  a  recent 
school  of  biblical  scholars,  that  Jewish  eschatology 
existed  fully  developed  in  ancient  Israel  long  before 
the  appearance  of  literary  prophecy  and  that  its  roots 
are  to  be  sought  in  Old-Babylonian  eschatological 
notions.  It  may  suffice  here  to  point  out  that  the 
claim  of  the  existence  of  an  Old-Babylonian  eschato- 
logical speculation  rests  on  postulation  rather  than  on 
estabhshed  facts,  and  that — not  to  consider  other 
objections — to  argue  the  existence  of  an  Israelitish 
eschatology  from  the  preexilic  prophetic  writings  is 
possible  only  by  reading  abstruse  meanings  and  hidden 
references  into  descriptions  which,  in  their  essence,  are 
purely  imaginative  and  poetic.  The  fact  is,  as  I  hope 
to  show  in  the  second  volume,  that  whatever  there  is  of 
positive  proof  points  to  the  rise  of  Jewish  eschatology 
in  the  Persian  period.  Sellin,  in  his  recent  book,  "  Der 
alttestamentliche  Prophetismus "  (Leipzig,  191 2), 
which  has  just  come  to  my  notice,  differs  in  his  view 
of  the  eschatology  of  Israel  from  the  scholars  just 
referred  to  in  that  he  holds  that  eschatology  was 
indigenous  to  Israel,  his  explanation  being  that  "the 
real  root  of  it  Hes  in  the  act  of  Revelation  from  Sinai " 
(p.  182).  I  may  add  that  Sellin's  view-point  through- 
out his  treatise  is  in  accord  with  this  explanation. 

My  treatment  of  the  prophets,  though  it  departs  to 
a  certain  extent  from  the  chronological  order  of 
presentation,  is  not  in  opposition  to,  but  is  in  full 
harmony  with  the  historico-critical  method  of  modern 
research.  This  method  means  for  that  province  of 
knowledge  which  deals  with  the  politico-social  and 
mental  development  of  the  human  race,  what  the 
analytic-genetic  method  means  for  the  province  of 
science.    Like  the  latter  it  insists  that  every  fact  or 


XX  FOREWORD 

phenomenon  under  consideration  be  minutely  ana- 
lyzed, that  is  to  say,  that  its  relation  to  its  environment 
be  determined,  and  its  development  and  growth  and, 
if  possible,  also  its  genesis,  be  traced.  For  it,  also, 
emphasizes,  as  the  guiding  principle  of  modem  re- 
search, that  no  real  knowledge  can  be  obtained  from 
detached  phenomena  or  isolated  facts;  in  other  words, 
that  no  fact  can  be  accepted  by  itself,  but  must  be 
recognized  as  a  part  of  a  great  complex,  the  inter- 
relations of  the  various  parts  of  which  must  be  closely 
studied  before  the  significance  of  the  special  phenom- 
enon can  be  ascertained. 

Up  till  recently,  however,  research  in  the  field  of 
literary  prophecy  can  hardly  be  said  to  have  fully 
complied  with  the  demands  of  the  analytic-genetic 
method.  It  concentrated  its  attention  on  the  historic 
side  of  the  problem,  that  is,  on  the  development  of  the 
prophetic  ideas  and  the  composition  of  the  prophetic 
writings,  and  neglected  to  a  large  extent  the  more 
vital  side  of  the  movement,  the  spiritual  side.  It 
failed  to  give  due  attention  to  the  "inward"  religion 
of  the  prophets,  and  this,  after  all,  must  be  the  investi- 
gator's primary  concern.  For,  however  important  it  is 
to  trace  the  reflections  and  speculations  which  ulti- 
mately entered  into  the  construction  and  shaped  the 
expression  of  their  views,  their  personal  religion,  the 
nature  and  quality  of  their  inner  experience,  of  their 
realization  of  their  relation  to  God,  can  be  the  only 
basic  starting-point.  The  touchstone  of  prophetic,  as 
indeed  of  every,  reHgion  is  not  so  much  the  particular 
interpretation  of  life  and  the  universe  to  which  the 
individual  prophets  were  led,  as  it  is  the  inner  fire 
which  was  kindled  in  them  and  the  active  life  of 
service  and  surrender  to  which  they  were  inspired. 


FOREWORD  xxi 

It  is  from  this  aspect,  the  aspect  of  tlie  prophets' 
personal  faith,  that  literary  prophecy  must  be  con- 
sidered first  of  all,  in  order  to  comply  fully  with  the 
analytic-genetic  method;  and  only  after  the  spiritual 
side  has  been  fully  considered  can  the  doctrinal  side  of 
the  movement,  that  is  the  new  world  of  religious  ideas 
to  which  it  gave  birth,  be  appreciated  in  its  tmc 
significance.  This  spiritual  side  of  the  prophetic 
movement,  it  has  seemed  to  me,  can  be  best  studied  by 
starting  with  it  at  the  point  of  its  highest  development. 
Therefore,  in  the  present  volume,  which  aims,  pri- 
marily, to  be  an  exposition  of  this  side  of  the  subject,  a 
departure  from  the  chronological  order  of  presentation 
has  been  made. 

It  must  further  be  noted,  in  explanation  of  my 
treatment  of  the  subject,  that  not  all  the  prophetic 
books  have  an  equal  value  or  a  Uke  character.  Thus, 
to  give  only  one  illustration,  the  Book  of  Nahum  is  an 
example,  among  the  preexilic  prophetic  writings,  of  the 
national  chauvinistic  prophecy,  the  representatives 
of  which  the  true  prophets  never  tired  of  denouncing. 
I  have  kept  in  view  mainly  the  six  great  prophets, 
Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  Micah,  Jeremiah,  and  Deutero- 
Isaiah  (Is.  XL-LV).  With  these  is  to  be  classed,  of 
preexiHc  prophets,  Zephaniah,  though  by  far  not  so 
great  and  original  a  personality  as  they,  and  of 
postexilic  prophets,  the  author  of  Is.  LVH,  15-LIX. 
Kinship  of  spirit  wath  these  great  prophets  must  be 
claimed  also  for  Zachariah  (Zach.  I-VHI),  though 
marked  originaUty  must  be  denied  him.  His  genius 
was  not  of  the  creative  order.  As  to  Ezekiel,  though 
his  importance  for  the  subsequent  religious  develop- 
ment in  Israel  must  be  acknowledged,  his  place  is 
not  among  the  great  prophets.    His  importance  in  a 


xxii  FOREWORD 

study  of  the  prophetic  movement  is  not  because  of  the 
nature  of  his  personal  faith,  not  because  of  his  own 
spiritual  conception  of  religion,  but  because  of  the 
practical  effects  of  his  teaching  on  the  official  reHgion 
of  his  day. 

In  conclusion,  just  a  word  on  the  question  on  which 
at  present  biblical  scholars  are  divided  into  two 
camps — the  question  whether  monotheism  originated 
with  the  Uterary  prophets  or  was  known  long  before 
their  appearance.  In  the  present  volume  I  refer  to  this 
question  directly  only  once,  and  then  of  necessity 
briefly.  I  hope  to  include  a  full  discussion  of  this  point 
in  the  second  volume,  and  shall  only  state  here  that 
my  study  of  the  prophets  has  confirmed  my  convic- 
tion that  the  position  of  the  Graf-Wellhausen  school 
on  this  question  cannot  be  dislodged.  However  scant 
the  references  of  the  prophets  are  to  the  official 
rehgion  of  their  times,  in  Judah  as  well  as  in  Israel, 
they  leave  no  doubt  that  monotheism  was  unknown  in 
Israel  prior  to  their  advent.  It  may  be  noted  also  that 
the  stories  of  the  patriarchs,  in  the  form  in  which  they 
have  come  down  to  us,  are  thoroughly  imbued  with 
the  prophetic  spirit,  and,  there  is  proof,  are  the  product 
of  the  final  metamorphosis  which  these  ancient  stories 
underwent  among  the  followers  of  the  great  prophets. 

In  translating  bibUcal  texts,  square  brackets  are 
employed  in  all  those  cases  where  there  is  no  exact 
word-equivalent  in  the  Hebrew  original,  but  where  the 
word  is  impHed  by  the  syntactical  construction. 

Moses  Buttenwieser. 

SCHLEUSSIG 

Southampton,  Ontario,  July,  1913. 


BOOK  I 
THE  FAITH  OF  THE  PROPHETS 

PART  I 


THE   PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

CHAPTER  I 
GENERAL   SURVEY 

THE  KEYNOTE  OF  THE  PROPHETIC  PREACHING — THE 
IMPORTANCE  OF  JEREMIAH 

If  one  should  attempt  to  sum  up  in  a  single  sentence, 
at  once  the  faith  of  the  prophets  and  the  most  striking 
truth  illustrated  by  the  history  of  Israel,  one  could 
not  do  it  more  fittingly  than  by  the  sublime  utterance 
of  the  prophet  Zachariah:  "Not  by  virtue  of  material 
strength  and  political  power  shall  ye  prevail,  but  by 
my  spirit,  saith  the  Lord."  ^ 

It  is  a  notable  fact  that  throughout  the  centuries 
of  its  history  Israel  never  really  attained  political 
prominence  among  the  nations.  In  view  of  the  favor- 
able situation  of  Palestine,  right  on  the  highroad  of 
traffic  between  the  countries  farther  east  and  those 
of  the  Mediterranean,  Israel  would  seem  to  have  had 
the  opportunity  of  developing  great  pohtical  power 
and  influence,  but  beyond  the  ambition  cherished  in 
this  direction  and  the  strides  made  toward  this  end, 
during  the  comparatively  brief  period  of  David's  and 
Solomon's  rule,  this  result  was  far  from  ensuing. 
Da\dd,  by  his  consolidation  of  the  kingdom  and  con- 
sequent multiplication  of  the  nation's  strength,  laid 
the  basis  for  commercial  development  and  political 

•  Zach.  IV,  6. 


4  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

prosperity,  and  Solomon,  by  following  up  this  advan- 
tage and  developing  the  possibilities  which  the  country 
offered  for  world-commerce,  succeeded  in  giving  Israel 
the  much-coveted  rank  and  standing  among  the  na- 
tions. But  the  progressive  policy  of  the  country  was 
short-lived,  owing  to  the  disruption  of  the  kingdom 
which  followed  on  Solomon's  death.  From  this  time 
on,  as  before  its  rise  under  David,  Israel,  when  not 
actually  subservient  to  other  nations,  was  at  least 
obliged  to  maintain  its  independence  with  a  struggle. 
PoHtical  prestige  among  the  nations  it  had  none.  As 
the  ancient  seer  aptly  expressed  it,  "It  is  a  people  that 
stands  alone,  that  does  not  count  among  the  na- 
tions." 1 

Not  only  politically,  however,  was  Israel's  standing 
insignificant.  Along  the  lines  of  material  and  intel- 
lectual ^  progress  its  achievement  was  just  as  slight. 
In  all  matters  of  general  culture  Israel  was  distinctly 
receptive  rather  than  productive.  After  conquering 
Canaan  it  did  not  create  a  civilization  of  its  own,  but 
adopted  that  of  the  native  Canaanites,  and  later,  that 
of  the  great  Kidlur-centres  of  the  ancient  world  with 
which  it  came  in  contact.  Neither  in  the  useful  nor 
fine  arts,  neither  in  science  nor  commerce  were  its 
achievements  as  a  nation  noteworthy.  We  read,  e.  g., 
of  Solomon's  sending  to  Phoenicia  for  skilled  masons 
and  artificers  when  building  the  Temple,  and  again,  of 
his  employing  Phoenician  sailors  for  the  conduct  of 
his  fleet. 

Israel's  originality  lies,  with  the  bulk  of  its  achieve- 
ments, in  another  sphere,  in  a  sphere  of  infinitely 
deeper  concern  for  man's  welfare  than  political  great- 

1  Num.  XXIII,  9. 

2  "  Intellectual "  is  used  here  in  the  narrower  sense  of  the  word. 


GENER.\L  SURVEY  5 

ness  or  material  advance.  It  became  men's  pathfinder 
in  their  search  after  the  truth,  after  the  knowledge  of 
God;  and  it  is  in  this  sphere,  the  sphere  of  the  spirit- 
ual, that  Israel  attained  imperishable  fame.  Here  its 
genius  soared  to  heights  never  reached  before,  nor 
surpassed  since;  and,  from  this  standpoint,  it  may  be 
said  without  exaggeration  that  in  the  whole  history  of 
human  progress  no  other  nation  has  made  such  a 
mighty  contribution  to,  or  exercised  such  a  lasting  in- 
fluence on  the  thought  of  the  world. 

This  great  realization  was  the  fruit  of  the  movement 
known  as  hterary  prophecy — that  wonderful  move- 
ment which  was  inaugurated  by  Amos,  the  shepherd 
of  Tekoa,  about  the  middle  of  the  eighth  century  B.  C, 
and  which  was  continued  after  him  by  an  unbroken 
Hne  of  prophets  through  upwards  of  three  centuries, 
before,  during,  and  after  the  exile. 

A  unique  and  imposing  spectacle  is  this  procession 
of  prophets,  appearing  as  they  did  under  untoward 
circumstances,  transcending  material  conditions,  tow- 
ering over  their  contemporaries,  preaching  by  divine 
compulsion  a  doctrine  which  for  their  age  had  neither 
material  basis  nor  historical  warrant,  bearing  testi- 
mony in  their  words  and  in  their  Hves  to  the  truth 
expressed  by  Zachariah,  "Not  by  virtue  of  material 
strength  and  pohtical  power  shall  ye  prevail,  but  by 
my  spirit,  saith  the  Lord."  For  mark,  not  at  the 
flood-tide  of  Israel's  power  did  these  prophets  appear, 
but  at  a  time  when  the  national  life  was  at  its  lowest 
ebb,  even  threatened  with  extinction;  and,  what  is 
equally  significant,  although  they  came  apparently  to 
predict  doom,  they  were  essentially  the  apostles  of 
faith  and  hope. 

Here,  indeed,  we  have  the  very  heart  of  the  matter. 


6  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

The  prophets  were  convinced  that  the  nation  must 
perish;  they  were  haunted  by  the  knowledge  of  their 
people's  sinfulness  and  of  the  impending  judgment. 
So  possessed  were  they  by  this  thought,  that  they 
were  unable  to  consider  other  problems  or  conditions, 
except  as  subsidiary  to  it.  But  while  brooding  over 
the  coming  ruin  of  their  people,  they  were  saved  from 
despair  by  the  deeper  spiritual  insight  which  came  to 
them,  by  the  larger  vista  that  opened  up  before  their 
soul.  They  caught  a  glimpse,  as  it  were,  of  God's 
larger  purpose;  and  in  this  light  realized  that  Israel 
was  but  part  of  the  general  plan,  and  that  the  present 
was  but  a  step  to  the  future.  They  had  a  vision — a 
wondrous  one  for  their  age — of  the  ultimate  regenera- 
tion of  mankind  and  the  universal  dominion  of  God ; 
and  it  was  this  vision  and  this  faith  that  inspired  them, 
and  gave  them  courage  to  go  forth  and  proclaim  to  a 
doomed  people  the  message  of  hope  they  had  received 
from  God,  the  gospel  of  final  deliverance  from  sin 
and  error. 

To  this  glorious  faith  the  writings  of  every  one  of 
the  prophets  bear  evidence.  It  is  the  keynote  of  the 
whole  prophetic  movement.  It  dignifies  even  the 
least  important  of  the  prophetic  books.  Let  us  con- 
sider, e.  g.,  the  book  of  the  postexilic  prophet  Zach- 
ariah,  from  which  we  have  already  quoted.  Taken 
as  a  whole,  the  writings  of  Zachariah,  when  judged 
according  to  their  literary  merits,  do  not  rank  high; 
yet  there  is  a  ring  of  idealism,  in  his  prophecies  which 
lends  them  both  significance  and  charm,  a  towering 
trust  by  which  one  cannot  but  be  impressed. 

The  lofty  vision  of  Zachariah's  predecessor,  Deutero- 
Isaiah,^  had  not  been  realized.  The  great  prophet 
1  Is.  XL-LV. 


GENER.\L  SURVEY  7 

of  the  exile  had  dreamed  of  Israel's  restoration  to 
glory  and  the  subsequent  regeneration  of  mankind, 
but  such  a  fulfilment  seemed  now  farther  ofT  than  ever. 
The  situation  of  the  newly-returned  exiles  was  most 
pitiable.  They  found  themselves  assailed  by  diffi- 
culties on  all  sides,  even  by  discord  witliin  their  own 
ranks.  Worst  of  all,  they  were  disheartened  by  the 
gloomy  \'iew  which  they  perforce  took  of  their  own 
situation.  Unable  to  rise  above  the  sordid  reality  of 
the  present,  they  failed  to  realize  that  confidence  is  as 
certainly  a  condition  of  victory  as  it  is  a  result  of  it. 
In  short,  they  lacked  faith. ^  Not  so,  however,  the 
prophet  Zachariah.  Where  others  saw  but  failure 
and  disappointment,  he  had  visions  of  a  glorious 
transformation  of  things;  he  saw  the  promise  of  a 
triumphant  future.  When  his  contemporaries  asked 
in  wonder,  how  in  the  face  of  their  most  depressing  ex- 
periences, he  could  still  cherish  such  dreams,  could 
have  such  faith,  could  still  hope  for  the  ultimate 
triumph  of  the  good,  the  prophet  in  reply  gave  utter- 
ance to  that  great  word  with  which  I  opened  this 
chapter:  "Not  by  virtue  of  material  strength  and 
pohtical  power  shall  ye  prevail,  but  by  my  spirit, 
saith  the  Lord."  ' 

Whence  springs  this  ardent  faith  of  the  prophets? 
They  themselves  give  us  the  answer.  Their  conscious- 
ness of  divine  inspiration  and  of  immediate  com- 

'  This  state  of  aflFairs  is  reflected  throughout  the  prophecies  of  both 
Zachariah  (Zach.  I-VIII)  and  his  contemporary  Haggai;  c/.  Zach. 
I,  12;  III,  2;  IV,  7a,  loa;  VIII,  10,  13;  Hag.  I,  2-1 1;  II,  3-5, 
11-14. 

2C/.  Zach.  IV,  6-10;  VI,  15;  VIII,  3-9,  13,  19,  also  II,  13,  15; 
see  also  my  article,  "  Remarks  on  tlic  Importance  of  Zacliariah  as  a 
Proplict  "  in  "  Studies  in  Jewish  Literature,"  issued  in  honor  of 
Pres.  K.  Kohler  (Berlin,  1913),  pp.  71-73. 


8  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

munion  with  God  is  their  fountain-light,  the  main- 
spring of  their  faith. 

Let  us  take  the  famous  passage  from  Amos:  "When 
the  lion  roars  who  can  but  fear;  when  the  Lord  God 
speaks  who  can  but  prophesy?"  ^  Amos  impKes  by 
this  parallel  that  as  the  roaring  of  the  lion  irresistibly 
inspires  fear,  so  does  God's  revelation  to  a  man  as 
inevitably  impel  him  to  prophesy. 

Still  more  explicit  is  Amos  on  this  point  in  his 
declaration  to  Ainaziah,  the  priest  of  Beth-El.  Ama- 
ziah  at  the  order  of  the  king,  had  forbidden  speech 
to  Amos,  telhng  him,  "Flee  for  thy  life  to  Judah" — 
i.  e.,  to  the  prophet's  native  country — "there  thou 
mayest  earn  a  livelihood  by  prophesying,  but  at 
Beth-El  thou  shalt  not  again  dare  to  prophesy."  ^ 
To  this  Amos  replied:  "I  am  not  a  prophet  nor  the 
disciple  of  a  prophet — I  am  a  shepherd  and  a  dresser 
of  sycamores — but  God  took  me  from  my  flocks, 
bidding  me  go,  prophesy  against  my  people  Israel!"  ^ 
By  this  seemingly  contradictory  assertion  Amos 
meant  to  emphasize  that  he  was  not  a  prophet  by 
profession,  nor  yet  by  his  own  choice — by  profession 
he  was  a  shepherd  and  a  grower  of  sycamores — but 
that  he  had  been  compelled  by  the  voice  of  God  to 
leave  his  herds  and  to  come  to  Beth-El  to  prophesy 
his  people's  doom.  And  so  little  did  he  heed  the  pro- 
hibition that  he  followed  up  his  declaration  just 
quoted  with  a  new  prophecy  addressed  particularly 
to  Amaziah,^  by  which  act  of  defiance  he  implied  that 
the  priest  and  the  king  could  no  more  suppress  his 
message  than  they  could  stay  God's  purpose. 

It    was   reserved   for   Jeremiah,    however,    almost 

1  Am.  Ill,  8.  » lb.  14,  IS. 

2/i.  VII,  12,  13.  *  lb.  16,17. 


GENER.\L  SURVEY  9 

two  centuries  later/  to  portray  the  elemental  force 
with  which  God's  revelation  took  possession  of  him: 
"Thou,  O  God,  hast  enthralled  me,  and  I  am  en- 
thralled; thou  hast  seized  and  overpowered  me!"^ 
Then  he  goes  on  to  tell  how  his  prophetic  gift  has 
brought  shame  and  discredit  on  him,  but  still  he  must 
obey  the  divine  force  within  him: 

"I  have  become  a  constant  target  for  laughter; 
every  one  mocketh  me.  For  as  often  as  I  speak  I  have 
to  cry  out,  have  to  complain  of  violence  and  abuse, 
for  the  word  of  God  but  serveth  to  bring  upon  me 
insult  and  derision  without  end.  And  I  thought  I  will 
not  heed  Him,  I  will  not  speak  any  more  in  His 
name;  but  it  was  within  me  as  a  raging  fire  shut  up 
in  my  bosom;  I  strove  to  withstand  it,  but  I  could 
not."  3 

Just  as  this  description  of  the  force  of  divine  in- 
spiration has  no  equal  in  prophetic  Kterature,  so  no 
other  prophet  was  possessed  to  such  a  marked  de- 
gree as  Jeremiah  by  the  conviction  of  his  divine  call 
and  by  the  consciousness  of  intimate  communion 
with  God.  Other  prophets  showed  equal  fervor  and 
singleness  of  purpose;  some  even,  as  the  Isaiahs, 
excelled  Jeremiah  in  the  loftiness  of  their  conception 
of  God  and  of  the  universe,  as  in  logical  precision  and 
clearness  of  thought,  and  in  poetic  beauty  and  aptitude 
of  language — in  fact,  in  all  those  quahties  which  per- 
tain distinctly  to  the  intellectual  side  of  the  prophetic 

*  The  date  of  the  confession  referred  to  here  is  587  B.  C,  see  Chap. 
IV,  §  2,  a. 

-Jer.  XX,  7. — I  use  "enthrall"  not  with  the  meaning  "enslave," 
but  with  the  meaning  "to  cast  a  spell  over,"  to  "hold  or  bring  under 
an  overmastering  influence." 


lo  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

movement;  but  as  an  exponent  of  the  purely  spiritual 
side  of  this  movement  Jeremiah  stands  without  a 
peer.  In  support  of  this,  one  need  only  point  to  his 
writings,  where  with  his  prophecies  proper  he  has 
interwoven  his  confession  of  faith  and  the  record  of  his 
religious  experience.  Any  discussion  of  the  faith  of 
the  prophets  must  centre  finally  in  this  fervid  record 
of  Jeremiah's. 

Throughout  the  book  of  Jeremiah  there  is  a  strong 
personal  note.  At  times,  in  the  so-called  confessions, 
e.  g.,  the  prophet's  innermost  soul  is  revealed  to  us. 
We  see  the  man,  his  struggles  and  his  sufferings,  and 
we  see  the  very  pulse  of  the  man — his  unvarying 
reliance  on  God's  presence  with  him. 

In  the  opening  chapter,  known  as  the  consecration- 
vision,  the  prophet  relates  how  God,  in  that  hour  when 
He  revealed  Himself  to  him,  spoke  the  following 
words  of  assurance: 

"Be  not  afraid  of  them  for  I  am  with  thee  to  deliver 
thee.  .  .  .  But  do  thou  gird  thy  loins  and  rise  and 
speak  to  them  whatsoever  I  bid  thee.  Be  not  dis- 
mayed by  them  lest  I  suffer  thee  to  be  dismayed  by 
them.  Behold,  I  make  thee  this  day  as  a  fortified 
city,  and  as  an  iron  pillar,  and  as  a  wall  of  brass 
against  the  whole  land,  the  kings  of  Judah,  her  princes, 
her  priests,  and  the  people  of  the  land;  they  shall 
wage  war  against  thee  but  not  conquer  thee,  for  I  am 
with  thee,  saith  the  Lord,  to  deliver  thee."  ^ 

These  words  with  which,  the  prophet  states,  God 
sent  him  forth  on  his  mission  are  not  mere  phrases 
calculated  to  produce  effect.  Every  word  reflects 
the  bitter  struggle  Jeremiah  had  to  endure  in  the 
pursuance  of  his  prophetic  mission.    One  needs  only 

ijer.  1,8,  17-19- 


GENERAL  SURVEY  ii 

to  recall  the  storm  of  opposition  and  persecution 
which  his  famous  Tcmplc-scrmon  ^  called  down  on 
his  head. 

In  this  sermon  Jeremiah  denounces  the  people's 
belief  in  the  inviolable  sanctity  of  the  Temple  at 
Jerusalem,  and  declares  that  God  will  destroy  the 
Temple  and  disperse  the  nation  in  order  to  show  that 
He  does  not  care  for  sacrifices  and  offerings,  but  solely 
for  an  obedient  heart  and  a  moral  life : 

"Thus  saith  the  Lord  Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Israel, 
amend  your  ways  and  your  doings  that  I  may  let 
you  dwell  in  this  place.  Put  not  your  trust  in  delu- 
sions like  this,  the  Temple  of  God,  the  Temple  of  God, 
the  Temple  of  God  are  these  structures.-  Nay,  only 
if  ye  thoroughly  amend  your  ways  and  your  doings, 
if  ye  scrupulously  practice  justice  toward  one  an- 
other, oppress  not  the  stranger,  the  fatherless,  or 
the  widow,  shed  not  innocent  blood  in  this  place,  nor 
worship  other  gods  to  your  hurt,  only  then  will  I  let 
you  dwell  in  this  place,  in  the  land  which  I  gave 
to  your  fathers,  forever.  Verily,  ye  put  your  trust 
in  delusions  that  are  of  no  avail.  [Think  of  it!]  to 
commit  theft,  murder,  adultery,  and  perjury,  to 
sacrifice  to  Baal  and  worship  other  gods  that  ye  know 
not,  and  then  to  come  and  stand  before  me  in  this 
house  dedicated  to  my  name  and  say,  we  are  safe — 


'VII,  1-15,  21-26;  cf.  Chap.  II,  §  I,  "The  Originally  Component 
Parts  of  the  Temple-sermon." 

=  Like  most  temples  of  antiquity,  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  con- 
sisted at  that  time  as  in  New  Testament  times  {cf.  Math.  XXIV,  i 
and  Mark  XIII,  if.)  of  a  number  of  buildings.  As  he  spoke  the 
words,  "The  Temple  of  God,  the  Temple  of  God,  the  Temple  of  God 
are  these  structures,"  Jeremiah  no  doubt  pointed  with  a  gesture  to 
the  Temple  and  its  adjoining  buildings. 


12  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

[safe]  in  doing  ^  all  these  shameful  things!  Is  this 
house,  dedicated  to  my  name,  a  den  of  robbers  in  your 
eyes?  Verily,  /  do  look  upon  it  as  such,-  saith  the 
Lord  (w.  3-1 1). 

"Thus  saith  the  Lord  Sabaoth,  the  God  of  Israel, 
add  your  holocausts  to  your  common  sacrifices,  and  eat 
the  meat!  For  on  the  day  I  brought  your  fathers  out 
of  Egypt,  I  did  not  give  them  any  command,  nor  did  I 
say  aught  unto  them,  concerning  holocausts  or  sacri- 
fices. But  only  this  did  I  command  them :  Hearken  unto 
my  voice;  have  me  for  your  God  and  be  ye  my  people, 
and  walk  in  the  way  that  I  ever  enjoin  upon  you" — 
i.  e.,  by  the  divine  voice  within^ —  ''so  that  it  may  be 
well  with  you"  (vv.  21-23). 

^l^ma'an  has  here,  as  quite  frequently  in  such  ironical  comments, 
the  force  "so  that,"  i.  e.,  "to  the  efifect  that,"  or  "with  the  result 
that." 

2  The  preceding  sentence,  h''fn^'arath  parislm  Itaja  hahhajith  kazzce, 
is  to  be  construed  as  object  of  raHthl,  a  by  no  means  infrequent  con- 
struction; hinne  serves  the  purpose  of  emphasizing  'anokhl,  and  gam, 
as  need  hardly  be  pointed  out,  receives  its  point  from  ¥'enekhaem. 

^  "^sawwcB  is  imperfect  of  reiterated  action.  That  "I  ever  enjoin 
upon  you"  has  the  import  here  stated,  follows  directly  from  the  whole 
tenor  of  the  sermon  as  well  as  from  the  connotation  which  the  terms 
"the  revelation  (Torah)  of  God"  and  "the  word  of  God,"  invariably 
have  in  the  prophetic  writings.  By  his  emphatic  declaration  in 
the  preceding  v.  22  Jeremiah  implicitly  denies  the  divine  origin  of  the 
Deuteronomic  Code  or  of  any  similar  sacred  lore,  while  throughout 
the  sermon  he  insists  on  the  divine  and  absolute  authority  of  the 
moral  law.  Is  it  not  clearly  a  postulate  of  this  reasoning  that  it  is 
through  the  moral  consciousness  that  God  communicates  with  man? 
The  same  reasoning  underlies  Amos'  challenge  to  invite  the  occu- 
pants of  the  palaces  of  Ashdod  and  Egypt  to  Samaria  to  witness  the 
lawlessness  prevailing  there  and  to  testify  against  the  house  of  Jacob 
(Am.  Ill,  9  £.,  13).  Nowack,  in  explanation  of  this  challenge,  rightly 
remarks  that  Amos  here  proceeds  from  the  premise,  not  of  a  written 
law  known  only  to  Israel,  but  of  a  imiversal  law  which  asserts  itself 


GENERAL  SITRVEY 


13 


Are  not  these  utterances  the  very  quintessence  of 
religion,  even  as  we  conceive  of  it  to-day?— Not  forms 
and  ceremonies,  but  God  in  man's  heart  and  in  his 
daily  Hfe. 

To  Jeremiah's  contemporaries,  however,  as  even  to 
much  later  generations,  such  utterances  seemed  rank 
blasphemy,  and  as  a  result  the  whole  nation  united 
against  him.  He  was  condemned  to  death  and  only 
with  difficulty  escaped  into  hiding,  from  which  he 
dared  not  emerge  for  over  ten  years,  until  the  death 

in  the  conscience  of  everj'  individual  and  every  nation — an  idea 
brought  out  very  pointedly  by  Amos  in  Chap.  I.  (See  "Die  Kleinen 
Propheten"  in  Nowack's  HK.  ad  loc).  So  too,  the  fact  that  "the 
word  of  God"  and  "the  revelation  (Torah)  of  God"  to  which  the 
prophets  peremptorily  demand  obedience  invariably  connote  "the 
living  prophetic  word,"  points  to  the  same  postulate.  The  use  of 
these  phrases  to  introduce  messages  like  Jeremiah's  Temple-sermon 
is  particularly  instructive  in  this  regard,  cf.  e.  g.,  Is.  I,  10.  No  less 
significant  are  vv.  4-5  of  the  resume  of  the  Temple-sermon,  given  in 
Jer.  XX\T,  inasmuch  as  these  verses  correspond  to  VII,  24-26,  the 
immediate  continuation  of  v.  23.  These  verses  read:  "Thus  speaks 
the  Lord,  if  ye  do  not  heal%.en  unto  me  by  walking  according  to  my 
Torah,  which  I  have  laid  before  you,  that  is,  by  hearkening  unto  the 
words  of  my  servants,  the  prophets,  whom  I  have  zealously  sent  unto 
you  though  ye  did  not  hearken  unto  them" — or  as  the  LXX  both 
here  and  VII,  26  pointedly  read — "unto  me."  Note  that  walking 
according  to  God's  Torah  is  expressly  defined  as  hearkening  to  the 
words  of  the  prophets,  and  that  obedience  to  the  prophets  is  in  turn 
defined — in  the  text  read  by  the  LXX — as  hearkening  unto  God. 
As  a  final  link  in  this  chain  of  evidence  may  be  mentioned  Jeremiah's 
sublime  conviction  that  in  the  ideal  future  there  will  be  no  written 
code  of  law,  but  that  God's  law  will  be  indelibly  inscribed  in  the  heart 
of  each  individual  (XXXI,  31-34).  As  W.  Robertson  Smith  expresses 
it,  "God's  Word,  not  in  a  book  but  in  the  heart  and  mouth  of  His 
servants,  is  the  ultimate  ideal  as  well  as  the  first  postulate  of  prophetic 
theology"  (see  "The  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church,"  p.  300). 
Cf.  also  infra  Part  II,  Chap.  II,  "Inspiration  as  opposed  to  Divination 
or  Possession,"  pp.  145II.,  150, 156. 


14  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

of  Jehojakim  made  it  safe  for  him  again  to  appear  in 
public.^  How  intense  was  the  hatred  of  the  people 
toward  him  and  to  what  abuse  he  was  subjected  be- 
cause of  the  Temple-sermon  may  be  seen  from  the 
confession,  XV,  lo,  15-21,  which  dates  from  this 
period,  in  which  the  prophet  exclaims:  "Woe  unto  me, 
my  mother,  that  thou  didst  bear  me,  a  man  of  strife 
and  enmity  for  the  whole  land;  I  have  not  lent  to  them 
nor  have  they  lent  to  me,  yet  everyone  curseth  me."  - 
This  persecution  which  began  with  the  Temple- 
sermon  continued,  except  for  a  comparatively  brief 
intermission,  until  the  very  close  of  Jeremiah's  career ; 
it  became  even  more  violent  toward  the  end.  From 
the  confessions  of  this  final  period  we  know  that  even 
his  nearest  relatives  and  most  intimate  friends  joined 
the  ranks  of  his  persecutors  and  conspired  against  him  : 
"Yea,  even  thy  brothers,  and  the  house  of  thy 
father,  even  they  have  become  treacherous  against 
thee,  even  they  talk  without  reserve  ^  behind  thy  back; 
do  not  trust  them  if  they  speak  kindly  to  thee" 
(XII,  6).  And  again:  "Yea,  I  hear  the  wliispering  of 
many,  attack  on  all  sides:  inform  on  him  or  let  us 
play  the  informer;  every  one  of  my  bosom-friends  is 
watching  to  contrive  my  downfall :  ^  perhaps  he  will 
let  himself  be  entrapped,  so  that  we  may  get  him  into 
our  power  and  take  revenge  on  him"  (XX,  10). 

^  See  Chap.  II,  §  2,  "Jeremiah's  Trial  and  Conviction." 

2  Read  kJilldm  qilHilni. 

^  male  is  elliptical  for  pe  male  (adverbial  accusative)  or  b^phe  male 
both  of  which  phrases  occur  in  Arabic  miVa  fi,  bimWi  fi;  see  Gold- 
ziher,  "All  b.  Mejmun  al-Magribi  and  sein  Sittenspiegel  des  ostlichen 
Islams"  in  ZDMG,  XXVIII  (1874),  310,  n.  i. 

*  saela'  means  "downfall,"  just  as  in  Ps.  XXXV,  15,  XXXVIII,  18, 
Job  X\Tn,  12;  cf.  Earth,  "  Wurzeluntersuchungen,"  p.  40  and  Gas. 
Buhl,  "Worterbuch,"  ^^  s.  v. 


GENERAL  SUR\'EY  1$ 

No  amount  of  persecution,  however,  could  shake 
Jeremiah.  Four  years  after  the  Temple-sermon  a 
great  fast  was  ordained  throughout  the  country, 
probably  on  account  of  the  peril  threatening  the 
nation  because  of  Nebuchadrezzar's  victory  over 
Pharao  Necho  at  Karkemish  in  the  year  604;  and 
Jeremiah  evidently  thought  the  occasion  propitious 
for  making  an  impression  upon  the  minds  of  the  people 
and  rousing  them  from  their  indifference. — Had  he  not 
all  these  years  been  predicting  the  very  disaster  of 
which  they  now  stood  in  dread?  As  the  death-sentence 
was  still  hanging  over  him,  he  dared  not  leave  his 
hiding-place  to  deliver  his  prophecies  in  person,^ 
so  he  had  Baruch  b.  Nerijah  write  down  all  the 
prophecies  he  had  delivered  up  to  that  time — he  him- 
self did  not  know  how  to  write  ^ — and  read  them  before 
the  people,  assembled  from  all  quarters  of  the  country, 
in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem.^  The  result  of  this  was 
that  his  sermons  were  burned  by  the  King,  and  his 
life  exposed  to  greater  danger  than  ever ;  ^  but,  un- 
daunted, he  caused  his  sermons  to  be  rewritten,^ 
and  this  time  took  occasion  to  add  a  characteristic 
confession  of  his  faith  in  God  and  in  the  power  of 
things  spiritual:^ — "Let  not  the  wise  man  boast  of 
his  wisdom,  nor  the  mighty  one  of  his  strength,  nor 
the  rich  man  of  his  wealth,  but  if  one  must  ^  boast  let 
him  boast  of  this,  that  he  understandcth  and  knoweth 

*  See  Chap.  II,  §  3,  "Jeremiah's  Escape." 
*See  Part  II,  Chap.  I,  "Jeremiah  could  not  Write." 
» See  Jer.  XXXVI,  iff. 
*Seeib.,v\\  11-26. 
'Seeift.,  w.  27-32. 

« See  Chap.  IV,  §  5,  b,  "The  Confession,  XVII,  sff.  and  its  origi- 
nally Component  Parts." 
''  See  infra,  pp.  io8f. 


1 6  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

me — that  I  am  the  Lord  who  doth  work  love,  justice, 
and  righteousness  in  the  world,  that  it  is  in  these 
things  that  I  take  delight,  saith  the  Lord"  (DC,  22). 

These  words  reveal  the  essential  spirituahty  of 
Jeremiah's  teaching.  Yet  this  man  who  preached  love, 
justice,  and  righteousness  was  flogged,^  imprisoned, 
thrown  into  a  dungeon,  treated  with  every  sort  of 
contumely. 

Physical  suffering,  however,  seems  to  have  been  but 
a  small  part  of  what  Jeremiah  had  to  endure.  In  his 
confessions  he  speaks  of  suffering  far  more  terrible 
than  any  persecution  or  bodily  privation,  viz.,  the 
joyless  Kfe  of  isolation  which  must  be  his  because  of 
his  prophetic  foresight.-  This  agony  of  soul  which 
Jeremiah  suffered  because  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
doom  awaiting  his  people  is  reflected  throughout  his 
book.  We  see  the  prophet  constantly  beset  by  visions 
of  the  approaching  catastrophe.  The  joys  of  Hfe  have 
become  a  mockery  to  him,  his  heart  can  never  more  be 
light.  Whithersoever  he  turns,  hideous  shadows  thrust 
themselves  across  his  path  and  drive  him  out  from 
the  circle  of  hfe's  joyous  ones,  yea,  make  it  impossible 
for  him  to  share  the  society  of  his  fellow-men  at  all. 
He  longs  to  flee  from  the  haunts  of  men,  where  his 
forebodings  have  made  him  an  object  of  derision  and 
a  laughing-stock  for  the  crowd,  to  hide  his  grief  in 
the  solitude  of  the  desert,  and  to  bear  his  hopeless 
burden  alone.    What  a  heavy  price  the  seer  pays  for 

^  Jeremiah  was  flogged  on  two  occasions,  when  he  provoked  the 
ire  of  the  Temple-overseer  Pashhur  (XX,  1-3)  by  his  prediction  that 
Jerusalem  and  the  nation  were  doomed — an  occurrence  the  date  of 
which  cannot  be  ascertained;  and  again  later  when  he  was  thrown  into 
the  dungeon  on  the  pretext  that  he  intended  to  desert  to  the  Chal- 
daeans  (XXXVII,  11-16). 

»  See  XV,  I7f.;  cf.  Chap.  IV,  §  5,  a,  pp.  Qgff. 


GENER.VL  SURVEY  17 

his  gift! — the  bitterest  isolation,  the  renunciation  of 
all  domestic  happiness,  the  inability  even  to  share  in 
the  common  joys  and  sorrows  of  his  fellow-men,  be- 
cause his  soul  is  filled  with  pictures  of  the  desolation 
and  misery  about  to  overtake  his  people.^ 

Yet  through  this  constant  anguish  of  spirit,  as 
through  the  persecution  he  had  to  suffer  from  his 
fellow-men,  Jeremiah  v/as  upheld  by  his  belief  that 
God  was  with  liim.  Indeed,  all  his  trials  and  suffering 
served  but  to  strengthen  his  reliance  on  God  and  his 
consciousness  of  God's  presence  with  him.  Herein 
lies  the  secret  of  his  power.  No  matter  how  often 
Jeremiah  cries  out  that  he  is  weary  of  Hfe,  since  in 
God's  service  he  has  to  bear  the  hatred  of  the  whole 
world,  he  always  ends  by  declaring  that  God  is  present 
with  him,  and  that  it  is  the  joy  of  his  soul  to  carry  out 
His  will,  so  that,  as  he  himself  puts  it,  he  verily  devours 
every  message  from  Him.-  The  bitter  complaint, 
cited  above,  that  his  enemies  beset  him  on  every  hand, 
and  that  even  his  bosom-friends  are  ready  to  betray 
him,  is  followed  up  by  the  joyful  exclamation,  "But 
since  God  is  with  me,  I  triumph  like  a  hero."  ^ 

Even  more  explicit,  if  possible,  is  another  passage, 
in  which,  referring  to  the  unceasing  persecution  he  has 
to  endure,  Jeremiah  reflects  that  those  who  are  un- 
compromisingly righteous  in  their  lives  are  beset  with 
hardships  and  trials,  while  the  unscrupulous  wicked 
enjoy  a  hfe  of  ease  and  prosperity:'*   "Absolutely 

1  Cf.  especiaUy  IV,  19-21,  VIII,  16,  18,  IX,  i,  XIV,  18,  XV,  i7f., 
XVI,  1-9;  see  also  Part  III,  Chaps.  II,  f.  "The  Prophets  Believe  the 
Doom  Inevitable." 

2  See  XV,  16. 

3  XX,  11;  cf.  Chap.  IV,  §  5,  d,  "The  Confession,  XX,  7-11,  13." 
«XII,  i-2a. 


i8  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

righteous  art  Thou,   O  God,"  he  calls  out,   "even 
though  I  venture  to  dispute  with  Thee,— yet  of  a  ques- 
tion of  justice  I  desire  to  speak  unto  Thee:  Why 
IS  the  way  of  the  wicked  prosperous,  why  are  all 
faithless  people  at  ease?     Thou  hast  planted  them 
hence  they  take  root,  thrive,  even  yield  fruit  "    For  a 
moment  this  reversed  order  of  things  seems  to  him 
hardly  reconcilable  with  the  justice  of  God— but  only 
for  a  moment.    Then  the  truth  comes  to  him- '  "Near 
art  Thou  to  their  mouth'W.  c,  the  mouth  of  the 
wicked-   but  far  from  their  heart;  but  Thou,  O  God 
Ihou  knowest  me.  Thou  seest  me  ever,^  Thou  hast 
tried  my  heart  which  is  at  one  with  Thee."  '    He  says 
in  effect  that  in  spite  of  the  material  prosperity  of  the 
wicked,  he  knows  that  no  relation  exists  between  them 
and  God,  whereas  he  feels  that  he  has  entered  with 
God   into   such   an   intimate   relation   that   nothing 
further  can  be  desired;  in  this  at-oneness  with  God 
he  possesses   the   supreme   good.     In   other   words 
he  recognizes  that  not  material  prosperity  constitutes 
man  s  happiness,  but  that  peace  and  strength  of  soul 
which  IS  enjoyed  only  by  him  who  lives  a  life  of  right- 
eousness and  feels  himself  at  one  with  God. 

In  this  consciousness  of  union  with  God  Jeremiah 
recognized  the  mainspring  of  all  his  endeavor,  and 

'  lb.  2b,  3a. 

2  tir'eni  is  imperfect  of  reiterated  action 
Zeit'-'f' !'  generally  misunderstood;  W.  Erbt,  "Jeremia  und  seine 
A    en  TeJ     '"^^°^^f  ^  ^'"  ^^"^^^^^'  "^'^  ^-lige  Schrift  des 
teTisX-^--'^^^^^^^  ^'.'-^  «"'"^^  '^  ^'^°g^^h--     The 

grammar. 


'     ^ b^>  "'^  ""^-J  uLuiLLca  11  altogether     The 

text  rs,  however  perfect  from  the  point  of  view  of  both  thought  and 

grammar,     'utakk  is  not  the  objective  of  im  but  its  qualific  th' 

The  quahficative  cons.stmg  of  a  prepositional  phrase  is  used  in  the 


c„„,-/.     ,  '«  "*  "  picpuMLionai  pnrase  is  used  in  the 

Semitic   languages   to   an   e.xtent   altogether   unknown   in   modern 
languages;  it  is  often  to  be  rendered  by  a  relative  or  temporaUW 


GENERAL  SURVEY  19 

from  it  he  derived  his  conviction  of  victory  notwith- 
standing apparent  failure. 

This  explains  why  the  prophet  of  the  deepest  gloom 
and  most  extreme  personal  privation  is  at  the  same 
time  the  prophet  of  the  most  ardent  hope.  For  as 
Jeremiah  is,  throughout,  the  one  of  all  the  prophets 
most  swayed  by  God's  revelation,  most  possessed  by 
the  consciousness  of  his  divine  call,  so,  more  fervently 
than  any  other  prophet,  does  he  bear  testimony  to  his 
conviction  that  he  was  called  to  pave  the  way  for  God's 
future  dominion — that  it  was  his  mission  but  to  sow 
the  seed,  that  the  harvest  would  be  reaped  in  some  fu- 
ture age.  Is  not  the  very  acme  of  zealous  faith  dis- 
closed by  his  account  of  how,  in  the  face  of  the  siege  of 
the  city  by  the  Chalda^ans,  he  bought  property  at  the 
behest  of  God  from  his  cousin  Hanameel,  and  of  how  he 
cirefully  arranged  for  the  preservation  of  the  deed  for 
future  ages — in  token  of  his  conviction  that  the  cities 
would  be  reinhabited  and  the  land  cultivated  again. ^ 

Jeremiah's  hope,  however,  did  not  end  with  the 
future  material  welfare  of  his  people;  his  hope  was 
for  the  spiritual  regeneration  of  all  mankind.  Char- 
acteristic evidence  of  this  is  that  confession  which 
he  had  added  to  the  second  collection  of  his  prophecies 
after  the  first  had  been  burned  by  the  King,  that  con- 
fession in  which  he  reveals  the  faith  and  the  hope  that 
illumined  his  whole  inner  life  and  sustained  him 
through  all  his  persecution, — the  faith  that  God,  who 
was  his  power  and  his  strength,  would  be  his  refuge  in 
the  hour  of  need,  even  on  the  day  of  the  downfall  of 
the  nation;-  the  hope  that  through  this  downfall  his 
people  would  ultimately  be  led  to  God. 

1  XXXII,  1-15. 
»XVI,  19,  XVII,  14-18. 


20  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

This  was  the  hope  which  inspired  Jeremiah  to  look 
beyond  the  tragedy  of  his  people's  doom;  this  his  hope 
for  his  people,  that  though  they  must  iirst  be  de- 
stroyed, they  would  flourish  again  at  some  future  day 
when  the  nations  would  come  from  the  ends  of  the 
earth  to  confess  to  God,  "  Verily  our  fathers  inherited 
but  falsehoods,  empty  beliefs  which  are  of  no  avail."  ^ 
1 XVI,  19. 


CHAPTER   II 

THE   TEMPLE-SERMON  AND   THE   PERSECU- 
TION OF  JEREMIAH  UNDER  JEHOJAKIM 

In'  the  foregoing  chapter  the  statement  was  made 
that  any  discussion  of  the  faith  of  the  prophets  must 
centre  in  the  fervid  record  which  Jeremiah  has  left  of 
his  inner  Ufe.  Inasmuch,  however,  as  this  record  dis- 
closes itself  as  the  immediate  product  of  the  persecu- 
tion which  he  had  to  suffer  from  his  fellow-men,  it 
behooves  us,  first,  to  fix  our  attention  on  the  circum- 
stances and  nature  of  this  persecution,  the  more  so 
as  the  prevailing  views  of  Jeremiah's  persecution  and 
prophetic  activity  are  in  certain  vital  points  open  to 
question. 

And  since  the  first  real  persecution  on  the  part  of 
the  nation  at  large  was  called  forth  by  the  Temple- 
sermon,  which  in  this  sense  may  be  said  to  mark  the 
first  crisis  in  Jeremiah's  prophetic  career,  a  discussion 
of  this  sermon  and  of  its  results  for  Jeremiah  will 
occupy  the  present  chapter. 

I .    THE  ORIGINALLY  COMPONENT  PARTS  OF  THE  TEMPLE- 
SERMON;  ITS  GENUINENESS 

The  Temple-sermon  did  not  originally  include  the 
whole  of  VTI,  i-VHI,  3,  but  must  have  consisted  of 
VII,  2-15,  21-26.  There  are  various  reasons  why 
VII,  27-VIII,  3  are  to  be  considered  a  separate  sermon 
or  a  fragment  of  one,  and  VII,  16-20  as  originally 
having  formed  a  part  of  the  same,    (i.)  Verse  27b,  as 


22  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

is  generally  conceded,  does  not  seem  to  be  original 
text;  the  LXX  did  not  read  it,  and  instead  of  "And 
thou  shalt  speak  all  these  words  unto  them"  (27a) 
and  the  opening  phrase,  ''And  thou  shalt  say  unto 
them,"  of  28,  they  simply  read  "uf^amarta  '"lehaem 
'aeth  haddabhar  hazzce,  "And  thou  shalt  say  this  word 
unto  them."  This,  however,  like  the  "And  thou  shalt 
say  unto  them"  of  VIII,  4,  sounds  like  the  concluding 
phrase  of  the  headings  which  preface  a  number  of 
Jeremiah's  sermons.  These  headings  give  the  date  of 
the  sermon,  the  circumstances  that  inspired  it,  and  the 
place  where  it  was  delivered,  and  conclude  with  the 
stereotyped  phrase,  "And  thou  shalt  say  unto  them" 
(or  "And  thou  shalt  say  this  word  unto  them," 
or  "And  thou  shalt  proclaim  these  words,"  as  the  case 
may  be.)  ^  (2.)  VII,  1-15,  21-26  are  a  denunciation  of 
the  people's  mistaken  behef  in  the  inviolable  sanctity 
of  the  TempJe  at  Jerusalem  and  in  the  divine  authority 
of  the  sacrificial  cult;  while  vv.  16-20,  28-VIII,  3  refer 
to  the  sacrificing  of  children  and  the  worshipping  of 
Istar  and  the  other  gods  of  the  Assyrian-Babylonian 
Pantheon.  (3.)  VII,  21ft*.  have  no  connection  with 
w.  16-20,  but  are  the  logical  continuation  of  3-15; 
while  w.  16-20,  which,  as  Duhm  points  out,^  break 
the  sequence  of  thought,  are  clearly  not  in  their 
proper  context.^  (4.)  Additional  proof  that  vv.  16-20, 
28-VIII,  3  did  not  originally  belong  here  with  VII, 
1-15,  21-26  is  furnished  by  Chap.  XXVI,  which,  be- 

iC/.  VII,  I  (note  also  XXVI,  i,  2),  XIX,  i,  2,  3a,  XXII,  i, 
XXXIV,  I,  2. 

2  "  Das  Buch  Jeremia,"  pp.  74  and  78. 

*  Giesebrecht  ("Das  Buch  Jeremia,"  ^,  prefatory  remarks  to 
Chap.  VII)  also  notices  that  vv.  16-20  break  the  sequence  of  thought, 
but  fails  to  draw  the  proper  conclusion  from  this  fact. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  23 

sides  relating  in  detail  the  date  and  place  of  the  ser- 
mon and  the  disastrous  consequences  it  had  for  Jere- 
miah, gives  a  brief  resume  of  it.  This  resume  applies 
perfectly  to  VII,  2-15,  21-26;  it  gives  unmistakably 
the  gist  of  these  two  parts,  but  has  no  application, 
no  reference  whatever  to  the  intervening  vv.  16-20  or 
to  the  following  piece,  28-VIII,  3. 

Duhm's  \iew  that  vv.  2-16,  21-26  arc  the  work  of 
later  compilers,  based  on  Baruch's  report  of  the 
Temple-sermon,^  is  obviously  not  compatible  with 
methodical  criticism.  The  sermon  bears  all  the 
earmarks  of  Jeremiah's  authorship.  It  is  the  most 
passionate  denunciation  of  the  sacrificial  cult  that  has 
come  down  to  us  in  prophetic,  or  for  that  matter,  in 
any  Hterature;  vv.  25-26  excepted,  every  utterance 
falls  like  the  blow  of  a  sledge-hammer.  The  prophet 
declares  that  only  the  moral  law  is  binding  and  of 
divine  authority,  that  to  the  IsraeHtes  in  the  wilder- 
ness God  commanded  no  laws  whatever  concerning 
sacrifices,  and  this,  it  must  be  remembered,  he  declares 
in  the  face  of  the  recently  promulgated  Deuteronomic 
law  claiming  divine  origin  for  the  sacrificial  cult. 
Thus  to  stamp  the  nation's  holiest  behefs  as  mockery 
and  delusion  required  the  penetration,  the  uncom- 
promising character,  and  the  boldness  of  a  Jeremiah. 
Indeed,  the  sermon  is  in  every  respect  consistent  with 
Jeremiah's  ideals  and  beliefs.  The  sweeping  rejection 
of  a  purely  rituahstic  religion,  on  the  one  hand,  and 
the  positive  view,  on  the  other,  that  the  moral  law 
implanted  in  the  human  heart  is  alone  authoritative, 
proceed  from  Jeremiah's  experience  of  the  power  of 
the  divine  within  himself,  and  accord  with  his  ideal 
of  the  future  consummation  as  expressed  in  Chap. 

'  Op.  ciL,  pp.  75ff.,  Soff. 


24  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

XXXI,  31-34.^    Such  a  vital  message  could  not  pos- 
sibly be  the  product  of  compilers. 

2.  Jeremiah's  trial  and  conviction 

The  authentic  record  of  the  consequences  which 
the  Temple-sermon  had  for  Jeremiah  is  found  in 
Chap.  XXVI,  one  of  the  fortunately  frequent  bio- 
graphic chapters  of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah.  This  chap- 
ter relates  that  Jeremiah's  prediction  that  the  Temple 
would  be  destroyed  and  the  nation  dispersed  caused 
an  uproar  among  the  priests,  prophets,  and  assembled 
people,  and  that  no  sooner  had  Jeremiah  finished  his 
sermon  than  he  was  seized  and  declared  to  have  in- 
curred the  death-penalty.  When  news  of  this  reached 
the  Sarim,  i.  e.,  the  high  officials  of  the  state,  they  at 
once  went  from  the  King's  palace  to  the  Temple  and 
opened  the  trial.  The  court,  it  is  important  to  note, 
was  composed  of  the  Sarim  and  the  people.  That  this 
was  the  practice  in  ancient  Israel  in  cases  of  capital 
punishment  we  know  from  other  sources;  and  that 
it  was  followed  in  this  particular  case  we  know  from 
the  fact  that  the  verdict  was  pronounced  by  the  Sarim 
and  the  people  together  (see  v.  16),  and  from  the  fur- 
ther fact  that  the  prosecuting  priests  and  prophets  in 
addressing  the  court  mentioned  expressly  both  the 
Sarim  and  the  people  (v.  1 1).  Moreover,  as  the  words, 
"as  you  have  heard  with  your  own  ears,"  spoken  on 
this  occasion  by  the  priests  and  prophets  in  addressing 
the  court,  could  properly  apply  to  the  people  only — 
the  Sarim  not  having  been  present  when  Jeremiah 
delivered  his  prophecy — it  stands  beyond  doubt  that 
the  people  had  a  voice  in  the  matter  and  were  not 
simply  bystanders. 

^See  Book  II,  Part  I,  pp.  3i8£,  322f. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  25 

After  the  priests  and  prophets  had  demanded  that 
he  be  sentenced  to  death,  Jeremiah,  speaking  in  his 
own  defence,  declared  that  he  had  been  sent  by  God  to 
prophesy  against  the  Temple  and  the  city  everything 
that  they  had  heard;  and  he  admonished  them  accord- 
ingly to  heed  God's  word  and  not  to  incur  additional 
guilt  by  killing  an  innocent  man.  In  conclusion  he 
reaffirmed  his  claim  that  he  had  been  sent  by  God. 

Verse  16  continues: 

"Then  the  Sari>n  and  the  people  spoke  to  the 
priests  and  the  prophets,  this  man  does  not  deserve 
the  death-penalty,  for  he  hath  spoken  unto  us  in  the 
name  of  YmxTi  our  God"  {'en  laHs  hazzce  mispat 
maicactJi  ki  ¥scmjaJiii'a;  ''Holicnu  dihhacr  'elenu). 

On  the  ground  of  the  first  part  of  this  verse  it  is 
generally  held  that  Jeremiah  was  acquitted;  and  the 
second  part  is  understood  accordingly  as  proving 
that  by  his  defence  Jeremiah  convinced  his  lay  judges 
that  he  was  a  true  prophet  of  Yhwh.  This  being  the 
case,  they  could  not  but  acknowledge  his  right  and 
authority  to  speak,  and,  naturally,  they  were  afraid 
to  put  him  to  death  as  the  priests  and  prophets  de- 
manded, for  fear  his  prophecies  might  be  fulfilled.^ 
There  are,  however,  serious  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
accepting  this  interpretation  of  the  verse. 

(i.)  Verse  16  is  followed  in  w,  17  and  18  by  the 
following  statement: 

"Thereupon  some  of  the  elders  of  the  country  rose 
and  spoke  to  the  whole  folk-tribunal,  Micah  of  Mare- 
shah  prophesied  in  the  days  of  Hezekiah,  king  of 
Judah,  and  told  all  the  people  of  Judah,  thus  saith 

'See  Cornill,  "  Das  Buch  Jeremia,"  ad  loc.  and  Einleitung,  p.  XXX; 
Duhm,  op.  cit.  ad  loc;  Giesebrecht,  op.  cil.  ad  loc;  Erbt,  "Jeremia  und 
seine  Zeit,"  p.  ii. 


26  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Yhwh  Sabaoth,  Zion  shall  be  ploughed  into  a  field,  and 
Jerusalem  shall  become  a  heap  of  ruins,  and  the  Tem- 
ple-mound shall  be  turned  into  wooded  heights.  Did 
Hezekiah  and  all  Judah  put  him  to  death?  Did 
they  ^  not  rather  fear  Yhwh  and  beseech  Yhwh,  so 
that  Yhwh  repented  of  the  evil  which  he  had  de- 
creed against  them?  But  we  are  bent  on  doing  ^  a 
great  wrong  bringing  guilt  upon  ourselves." 

If,  as  V.  1 6  reads,  Jeremiah  was  acquitted,  acquitted 
moreover,  because  the  Sarlm  and  the  people  realized 
that  he  was  sent  by  God,  what  possible  need  or 
justification  could  there  be  for  such  a  defence  on  the 
part  of  the  elders?  Giesebrecht  notices  this  discre- 
pancy as  well  as  another  to  be  mentioned  presently, 
but  ascribes  it  to  the  fact  that  the  chapter  was  pre- 
sumably not  dictated  by  Jeremiah,  but  was  the  work 
of  Baruch.^  This,  however,  explains  nothing,  as  we 
have  no  reason  to  suppose  that  Baruch  did  not  know 
what  he  was  writing  about.  Duhm's  explanation  is 
still  less  credible:  "Nachdem  Jeremia  schon  gerettet 
ist,  kommt  iJim  noch  eine  unerwartete  Unterstuizung."  "* 
If  Jeremiah  had  just  been  acquitted,  there  would  be  no 
sense  in  this  belated  plea  in  his  behalf.  The  words, 
"but  we  are  bent  on  doing  ^  a  great  wrong  bringing 
guilt  upon  ourselves,"  with  which  the  elders  concluded 
their  plea,  would  imply  that  Jeremiah  had  not  been 
acquitted  at  all,  but,  on  the  contrary,  that  he  had 
been  sentenced  to  death. 


'  Readji/'M  in  accordance  with  the  LXX,  Pes.,  &  Vulg. 
2  See  infra,  pp.  io8f. 

'  Op.  cii.  prefatory  remarks  to  Chap.  XXVI. 
<  Op.  cit.  ad  loc. 

*  By  the  use  of  the  participle  here  resolution  is  expressed;  cf.  infra, 
pp.  io8f. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  27 

(2.)  Verses  20-23,  which  are  connected  with  the 
preceding  part  by  'w'gam,  go  on  to  relate  how  "at  the 
same  time  another  man,  Urijah  b.  Shemajahu  of 
Kirjath  ha-Yaarim,  appeared  as  prophet  in  the  name 
of  Yh\\^  {b'^cm  jaJrd'cc)  and  prophesied  against  this 
city  and  this  country  precisely  after  the  manner  of 
Jeremiah's  words."  And  when  the  king  Jehojakim 
and  the  Sarim  heard  of  his  words  they  ^  sought  his 
Hfe,  whereupon  Urijah  fled  to  Egypt.  But  by  the 
king's  order  he  was  brought  back  from  Egypt  and 
executed.  That  Urijah's  prophecy  did  not  precede 
but  followed  that  of  Jeremiah  may  be  deduced  with 
certainty  from  "precisely  after  the  manner  of  Jere- 
miah's words,"  which  is  equivalent  to  'precisely  as 
Jeremiah  had  prophesied;'  had  Urijah's  prophecy 
been  the  prior  event  the  comparison  would  have  been 
reversed.  Instantly,  however,  the  question  rises,  if 
Jeremiah  had  just  been  acquitted,  acquitted  even 
with  expressions  of  reverence  for  his  person  and  his 
mission,  why  should  Urijah  under  precisely  similar 
circumstances  have  been  dealt  with  so  implacably? 
ISIoreover,  on  what  authority  of  the  law  could  the 
king  and  the  Sarim  without  due  trial  order  Urijah's 
execution,  if  there  were  no  precedent  to  warrant  such 
a  summary  procedure?  Such  a  course  would  be  con- 
trary to  all  that  we  know  about  the  legal  customs  and 
jurisdiction  of  the  king  and  the  Sarim  in  ancient 
Israel.  Even  when,  later,  during  the  siege  of  the  city 
by  the  Chalda^ans,  Jeremiah  was  considered  guilty  of 
treason,  and  Zedekiah  had  empowered  the  Sarim  to 
deal  with  him  as  they  wished,  this  body  did  not  ven- 
ture to  kill  him  without  a  trial,  but  had  him  thrown, 
instead,  into  a  miry  cistern  where  he  might  perish.^ 
'  In  accordance  with  the  reading  of  the  LXX.      *  See  XXXVIII,  i-^. 


28  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

(3.)  The  report  about  Urijah's  fate  is  followed  up 
by  V.  24:  "But  Ahikam  b.  Shafan  protected  Jeremiah 
so  that  he  was  not  delivered  up  to  the  people  to  be 
put  to  death."  The  only  inference  possible  from  this 
plain,  unequivocal  statement  is  that  Jeremiah  had 
been  condemned  to  death,  and  that  he  would  have  been 
executed  had  not  Ahikam  interfered.  Duhm's  at- 
tempt to  reconcile  this  verse  with  v.  16  ^  may  be  passed 
over.  Verse  24  cannot  possibly  be  reconciled  with 
V.  16,  for  the  latter,  as  the  text  now  reads,  states  that 
Jeremiah  was  acquitted  by  the  Sarim  and  the  people 
constituting  the  court,  while  the  former  states  in 
plain  words  that,  without  the  protecting  hand  of 
Ahikam,  Jeremiah  would  have  been  handed  over  to 
the  people  for  execution  (in  accordance  with  the  law 
and  custom  in  cases  of  this  category;  cj.  Deut.  XIII, 
10,  XVII,  7,  also  Lev.  XXIV,  14,  16,  Num.  XV,  35f.). 

(4.)  One  cannot  but  ask,  'What  new  fact  did 
Jeremiah  present  to  the  Sarim  and  the  people  by  his 
assertion  that  he  was  sent  by  Yhwti  to  prophesy  as 
he  did?'  Was  not  every  word  that  he  uttered  in  his 
sermon  spoken  in  the  name  of  Yhwh?  Why  then  did 
not  his  sermon  arouse  fear  and  trembling  in  the  people 
and  cause  them  to  bow  to  the  divine  authority  by 
which  he  spoke,  instead  of  inciting  them  to  demand  no 
less  emphatically  than  the  priests  and  prophets  that 
he  be  put  to  death?  In  truth,  that  Jeremiah's  persist- 
ent claim  to  divine  authority  could  not  possibly  have 
had  any  such  weight  with  the  people  as  v.  16  would 
seem  to  imply,  is  shown  clearly  by  v.  9,  in  which  the 
frenzied  people  ask  Jeremiah,  "Why  didst  thou 
prophesy  in  the  name  of  YhwH  {Vsem  jahwce),  this 
Temple  shall  become  Hke  Shilo,  and  this  city  shall  be 

^  Op.  cit.  ad  loc. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  29 

devastated,  shall  become  destitute  of  inhabitants?" 
It  is  obvious  that  the  words,  b'Sem  ja/rd'cc  "in  the 
name  of  YH^^'H,"  are  the  real  point  in  this  question. 
The  fact  that  the  prophecy  was  uttered  in  the  name 
of  YH^^^I  clearly  formed  an  incriminating  circum- 
stance. Note  the  similar  significant  addition  of  b'l^em 
jaJriVCB  in  the  ultimatum  of  the  priests  of  Anathoth 
mentioned  by  Jeremiah  in  XI,  21:  "Thou  shalt  not 
prophesy  in  the  name  of  Yhwh  QfUm  jaJnvcc),  that 
thou  die  not  at  our  hand."  In  fact,  that  in  all  such 
cases  it  was  not  the  prophesying  per  sc  which  consti- 
tuted the  real  offence,  but  the  prophesying  in  the  name 
of  YHWH,  is  evident  from  the  explicit  proviso  in  the 
Deuteronomic  law,  Deut.  XVIII,  15-22. 

Strange  to  say,  this  law  has  always  been  interpreted 
as  if  it  were  written  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  lit- 
erary prophets,  that  is,  as  if  the  Hterary  prophets' 
standard  of  true  and  false  prophets  were  at  the  basis 
of  it.i 

Obviously,  however,  there  is  a  radical  error  in  such  an 
interpretation.  The  authority  of  the  hterary  prophets 
from  Amos  to  Jeremiah  was  never  recognized  by  the 
exponents  of  the  official  religion  of  their  age.  If  not 
constantly  persecuted,  as  was  Jeremiah,  or  forbidden 
speech  and  expelled  from  the  country,  as  was  Amos, 
the  literary  prophets  were  invariably  met  with  scorn 
and  derision,  often  even  with  hostihty  (r/.  Hos.  IX,  yf., 
Is.  XXVIII,  gf.,  XXX,  lof.).  On  the  other  hand, 
their  opponents,  whom  they  denounced  as  false  proph- 
ets, were  regarded  by  their  contemporaries  as  the  true 
mouthpieces  of  Yhwh,  the  authoritative  interpreters 

'  C/.,  e.  g.,  Driver,  "Deuteronomy"  (in  the  International  Critical 
Commentary),  Steuernagel,  "Dcutcronomium"  (in  Nowack's  HK.), 
Bertholet,  "Deuteronomium"  (in  Marti'sHC),  adloc. 


30  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

of  his  will.  In  view  of  this  fact,  it  is  clear  that  the  law, 
Deut.  XVIII,  15-22,  dating  from  the  time  of  Jere- 
miah's prophetic  activity,  must  have  been  intended  to 
safeguard  the  rehgious  beHefs  of  the  people,  which 
were  felt  to  be  menaced  by  the  preaching  of  the  liter- 
ary prophets;  and,  accordingly,  verse  22  will  be  seen  at 
once  to  have  a  very  different  meaning  from  the  one 
hitherto  ascribed  to  it.  Verse  22  has  invariably  been 
taken,  by  modern  as  well  as  by  ancient  exegetes,  as 
meaning  to  say  that  by  the  non-fulfilment  of  his 
prophecy  the  prophet  shall  be  recognized  as  a  false 
prophet.  Now,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  Deut.  XIII,  3,  4 
says  precisely  the  opposite  of  this  (Bertholet  to  the 
contrary), '^  viz.,  that  Yhwh  may  permit  "the  sign  and 
wonder"  of  the  false  prophet  to  be  fulfilled  in  order  to 
test  the  people's  belief  in  Him.  Further,  the  custom- 
ary rendering  of  v.  22  is  hardly  logical  in  view  of  v.  20, 
which  commands  the  people  to  put  to  death  the  false 
prophet.  If  the  prophet's  status  should  be  deter- 
mined by  the  fulfilment  or  non-fulfilment  of  his  proph- 
ecy, a  result  which  could  be  ascertained  only  after  the 
lapse  of  time,  perhaps  of  years,  such  a  command  would 
be  meaningless.  Conviction  at  the  time  the  prophecy 
was  delivered  would  be  impossible. 

By  reason  of  these  facts,  the  customary  interpreta- 
tion of  V.  22  is  untenable,  even  if  Jer.  XXVIII,  9  be 
understood  as  laying  down  the  rule  that  in  the  event 
a  prophet  predicts  good,  he  shall  by  the  fulfilment  of 
his  prophecy  be  recognized  as  truly  sent  by  God.  The 
fact  of  the  matter  is,  however,  that  Jeremiah  uses 
irony  in  this  verse.  The  nation  is  so  iniquitous  in  his 
eyes  that  he  scouts  the  idea  that  an  inspired  prophet 
could  predict  anything  but  evil.  His  summary  denun- 
1  Op.  cit. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  31 

ciation  of  Hananiah  as  a  false  prophet  in  w.  12-16^ 
accords  with  this,  as  docs  also  the  fact  that,  as  regards 
himself  and  his  predecessor-prophets,  he  considers 
it  self-evident  that  their  prophecies  bear  the  stamp 
of  truth  in  themselves  and  require  no  proof  beyond 
this.  There  is  thus  a  close  relation  between  Jer. 
XXVIII,  8,  9  and  XXIII,  16-22,  and,  read  in  the  light 
of  the  latter,  the  meaning  of  the  former  is  at  once  clear. 
What  Jeremiah  really  means  to  say  is  that  the  proph- 
et's own  consciousness,  his  inward  con\action,  is  the 
incontrovertible  proof  of  his  divine  calling — a  concep- 
tion of  prophecy  concurred  in  either  directly  or  in- 
directly by  every  one  of  the  great  literary  prophets. 
Indirectly  they  furnished  proof  that  this  was  their 
idea  by  the  fact  that  they,  one  and  all,  truthfully 
preserved  even  those  prophecies  in  which  their  predic- 
tions had  been  disproved  by  the  actual  outcome  of 
events;  thus  they  showed  that  whether  their  prophe- 
cies were  Kterally  fulfilled  or  not  had  no  weight  what- 
ever with  them,  was  not  considered  by  them  at  all 
as  a  criterion  of  divine  calling  or  inspiration.^ 

It  is  thus  clear  that  the  usual  interpretation  of 
Deut.  XVIII,  22  has  no  raison  d'etre  other  than  the 
preconceived  idea  with  which  later  ages  approached 
the  verse.  The  translation  of  the  verse,  as  required 
by  what  we  pointed  out  to  be  the  historical  basis  of 
the  law,  w.  15-22,  must  be  as  follows: 

If  it  happen  that  a  prophet  pronoimceth  in  the  name 

^Verses  12-16  are  the  immediate  continuation  of  vv.  i-ii; 
wajjclaekh  jirm^jd  hannabhi  l^'darko  ("and  the  prophet  Jeremiah  went 
his  way"),  nb,  is  interpolated;  the  interpolation,  as  Cornill,  op.  cit. 
ad  loc,  rightly  showed,  grew  out  of  the  misunderstood  halokh  of  the 
phrase  halokh  wf^amarta  of  v.  13. 

*  Cf.  infra,  pp.  i.$iS. 


32  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

of  YnWH  that  which  shall  not  he  or  occur, '^  that  is  the 
word  which  Yewh  hath  not  spoken;  presumptuously 
hath  the  prophet  pronounced  it:  you  shall  not  he  afraid 
of  him." 

The  words,  "which  shall  not  be  or  occur,"  find 
their  explanation  in  the  express  declaration,  Deut. 
XIII,  I,  that  none  of  the  commandments  enjoined  in 
this  code  should  ever  be  altered  or  abolished.  The 
verse  is  aimed  at  such  prophetic  utterances  as  Am. 
V,  21-25,  Hos.  VI,  6,  VIII,  11-13,  Mic.  VI,  6-8,  Is.  I, 
11-17,  Jer.  VII,  2iff.,  which  declare  that  the  sacrificial 
cult  has  no  divine  authority.  The  meaning  of  the 
verse  is  that  the  false  prophet  is  to  be  recognized  by 
his  speaking  in  defiance  of  the  Law,  which  is  eternally 
and  absolutely  binding. 

The  law  as  a  whole  substantiates  this  interpretation. 
Verses  15-19  define  indirectly  the  qualifications  of  the 
true  prophet.  In  accordance  with  the  people's  demand 
at  Horeb,  Yhwh  will  raise  up  among  them  a  prophet 
like  Moses,  who  will  expound  His  Law  and  interpret 
His  will,  and  unto  whom  they  shall  hearken — the 
deduction  from  this  being  that  the  true  prophet  must 
first  of  all  recognize  the  absolute  authority  of  the 
divine  Law  (in  accordance  with  Deut.  XIII,  i),  and 
further,  that  it  must  be  his  foremost  mission  to  im- 
plant obedience  to  the  Law  in  the  hearts  of  the  people. 
(Illustrations  of  prophetic  activity  of  this  type  are 
Ezekiel's  reHgious  constitution  for  the  future  nation, 
Ezek.  XL-XLVHI,  and  the  sermon,  Jer.  XVII, 
19-27,  dating  from  the  time  of  Ezra  and  Nehemia,- 

^  By  the  synonymous  phrases,  Id  jihja  iv^ld  jabho,  emphasis  is 
added. 

2  See  Note  on  the  Date  of  Jer.  XVII,  19-27,  at  the  end  of  the 
chapter. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  33 

which  has  for  its  object  to  exhort  the  people  to  observe 
the  Sabbath.) 

Verses  2off.  deal  with  the  prophet  who  has  no  claim 
to  obedience,  and  who  under  no  condition  must  be 
accepted  as  true,  specifically,  the  prophet  who  pro- 
nounces in  the  name  of  Yhwh  what  Yh\\h  has  not 
enjoined.  The  prophet  who  speaks  in  the  name  of 
other  gods  is  also  referred  to,  but  as  this  case  was 
taken  up  fully  in  XIII,  2-6,  it  receives  only  cursory 
mention  here.  The  reason  that  both  cases  are  classed 
together  in  this  law  is,  doubtless,  that  from  the  point 
of  view  of  the  lawgiver,  the  case  of  the  prophet  who 
speaks  in  defiance  of  the  Law,  and  the  case  of  the 
prophet  who  speaks  in  the  name  of  other  gods  fall,  in 
reality,  in  one  and  the  same  category,  inasmuch  as 
both  tend  to  the  same  result,  the  estrangement  of  the 
people  from  the  worship  of  Yhwh  as  laid  down  by  the 
Law.  The  law  prescribes  that,  "even  as  he  who  speaks 
in  the  name  of  other  gods,"  a  prophet  who  pronounces 
what  Yhw^  has  not  enjoined  shall  be  put  to  death, 
that  is,  as  w.  20  and  21  expressly  define,  if  he  speaks 
in  the  name  of  YHWH:  "But  the  prophet  who  pre- 
sumes to  speak  in  my  name  {hismi)  .  .  ."  (v.  20), 
"If  it  happen  that  a  prophet  pronounces  in  the  name 
of  Yhwh  {b'Sem  jalrwce)  .  .  ."  (v.  22).  There  are, 
it  will  be  noted,  two  conditions  specified,  that  the 
prophet  deliver  a  message  that  is  contrary  to  the  Law, 
and  that  he  deliver  this  message  in  the  name  of  Yhwh. 
Strangely  enough,  biblical  scholars  hitherto  have 
failed  to  note  the  importance  of  the  second  condition; 
they  have  looked  upon  b'se?n  jalnvcE  and  the  virtually 
identical  hihu-i  as  a  conventional  phrase  contributing 
nothing  to  the  general  sense.  Yet  it  will  be  readily 
seen  that  in  reality  it  states  the  condition  sine  qua 


34  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

non.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  in  those  days  not  only 
the  religious  law  but  the  civil  law  and  even  the  cus- 
toms of  daily  life  were  believed  to  rest  on  divine 
authority,  and  as  prophecy  was  looked  upon  as  the 
medium  through  which  the  divine  will  was  communi- 
cated— "prophecy" meaning  "the  word  from  God"  or 
"from  the  gods,"  and  "prophet,"  "interpreter  of  the 
word  and  will  of  God  "  or  "  of  the  gods" — a  message  not 
delivered  in  the  name  of  Yhwh  would  not  have  to  be 
considered  seriously  (unless,  of  course,  it  was  delivered 
in  the  name  of  other  gods,  in  which  case  it  would  come 
under  the  law,  XIII,  2-6) ;  in  fact,  it  would  not  sim- 
ulate the  prophetic  message  at  all,  inasmuch  as  it  did 
not  make  any  claim  to  divine  authority.  To  declare 
what  is  contrary  to  the  Law  might  be  reprehensible  in 
itself — this  point  need  not  occupy  us — but  to  declare 
what  is  contrary  to  the  Law  in  the  name  of  Yhwh, 
i.  e.,  to  claim  divine  authority  for  such  a  false  message 
would  be  blasphemous;  and  it  was  precisely  such  cases 
that  the  law,  Deut.  XVIII,  15-22,  was  intended  to 
cover.  ^ 

Now  when  we  come  to  consider  the  case  of  Jeremiah 
in  the  light  of  this  Deuteronomic  law,  at  once  two 
things  become  clear.  The  first  is  that,  in  view  of  this 
law,  the  priests  and  the  legally  recognized  prophets, 
both,  by  virtue  of  their  office,  the  legitimate  guardians 
of  the  law  (in  addition  to  w.  18,  19,  cj.  Deut.  XVII, 
8-12,   XXXIII,  9f.),   could  not  do  otherwise  than 

^  From  the  explanation  of  this  law  as  given  in  these  pages,  it  follows 
that  there  is  no  ground  for  the  view,  held  by  various  scholars,  that  this 
law  did  not  form  a  part  of  the  law-book  promulgated  in  the  days  of 
Josiah,  but  originated  later.  Marti  in  Kautzsch,'  ad  loc,  and  A.  F. 
Puukko,  "Das  Deuteronomium"  (1910),  pp.  254f.,  are  the  latest 
advocates  of  this  theory,  both  considering  this  law  the  work  of  the 
Redactor. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  35 

demand  that  Jeremiah  be  put  to  death  for  his  proph- 
ecy, Jer.  VII,  1-15,  21-26;  for  in  declaring  that  no 
sanctity  was  to  be  attributed  to  the  Temple  at  Jeru- 
salem any  more  than  to  Shilo  of  old,  and  that  the 
sacrificial  cult  had  no  divine  authority,  Jeremiah 
struck  a  blow  at  the  very  root  of  the  Deuteronomic 
reformation.  In  the  eyes  of  his  contemporaries  he 
was  undermining  their  most  sacred  institutions,  was 
declaring  in  the  name  of  Yiiwh,  "what  shall  not  be  or 
occur."  Jeremiah  himself  tells  us  in  Jer.  XVIII,  18 
that  it  was  for  the  safeguard  of  the  Law  that  he  was 
persecuted:  "Come,  let  us  plot  against  Jeremiah,  that 
the  Torah  of  the  priest,  and  the  counsel  of  the  sage, 
and  the  revelation  of  the  prophet  may  not  be  imper- 
illed" ^  {cf.  VIII,  8).  It  cannot  be  objected  that 
Micah's  prophecy  of  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  at 
Jerusalem  had  no  such  serious  consequences  for  him, 
for,  as  far  as  we  know,  there  did  not  exist  at  that  time 
any  law  that  would  apply  to  such  cases;  and  further, 
it  will  be  remembered,  in  Micah's  time  the  Temple 
at  Jerusalem,  though  held  inviolable,  was  not  vested 
with  the  supreme  sanctity  and  authority  which  in 
Jeremiah's  days  accrued  to  it  in  consequence  of  the 
promulgation  of  the  Deuteronomic  Law  and  the 
centralization  of  the  cult.- 

The  second  thing  that  becomes  clear  is  that,  far  from 

1  ki  of  ki  Id  thohhad  has  the  force  of  a  consecutive  particle;  if  an 
existing  state  of  affairs  were  referred  to,  as  Rothstein  in  Kautzsch,' 
Duhm,  op.  cit.  and  Cornill,  op.  cil.  wrongly  assume  in  their  rendering 
and  interpretation  of  the  verse,  the  perfect  and  not  the  imperfect 
would  have  to  be  used,  as  e.  g.,  VII,  28,  XLIX,  7;  Ezek.  XII,  22, 
XXXV'II,  II.  Other  examples  of  the  use  of  ki  as  consecutive  parti- 
cle in  a  negative  sentence  arc:  ki  Id  'abho,  etc.,  I  Sam.  XXIX,  8;  ki  Id 
thukhal  s"etko,  Deut.  XIV,  24. 

*  See  also  Part  III,  Chap.  VI,  §  6,  pp.  293f. 


36  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

favorably  impressing  his  judges  by  his  persistent  claim 
that  he  was  sent  by  God  to  make  this  prophecy, 
Jeremiah  must  have  convinced  them  beyond  a  doubt 
that  he  really  deserved  the  death-penalty.  In  fact, 
everything  points  to  the  conclusion  that  the  sentence 
passed  by  the  Sarim  and  the  people  sitting  in  judgment 
over  Jeremiah  must  have  been: 

"  Verily  this  man  deserves  the  death-penalty,  because 
he  hath  spoken  unto  us  in  the  name  of  YHWH  our  God." 

The  only  change  required  in  verse  i6  to  restore  what 
according  to  this  conclusion  must  have  been  the 
original  text  is  to  change  the  vocalization  of  'en  (V^) 
to  'in  (r^).  We  would  then  have  here  another  ex- 
ample of  the  particle,  'in,  which  occurs  in  I  Sam.  XXI, 
9,  and  which  has  baffled  ancient  and  modern  exegetes 
alike,  but  which  on  closer  examination  proves  to  be  a 
byform  of  the  emphatic  particle,  hen,  hinne} 

It  is  not  difficult  to  understand  how  even  at  an 
early  date  this  rare  'in  should  have  been  misread  in 
our  passage  in  Jeremiah.  As  early  as  the  Hellenistic 
period,  if  not  before  that  time,  Jeremiah  was  prac- 
tically canonized;  in  fact,  all  the  Hterary  prophets 
were  looked  upon  much  as  heroes  and  saints,  and  a 
radically  different  view  was  taken  of  their  activity  from 
that  which  had  been  held  by  their  contemporaries. 
Accordingly,  when  the  people  of  those  times  read 
Jer.  XXVI,  1 6,  the  denial  of  Jeremiah's  guilt  lay  much 
nearer  their  thoughts  than  the  affirmation  of  it,  and 
they  very  naturally  read  'en. 

By  the  reading  of  'in  for  'en,  and  by  this  reading 

alone,    do    the    various    discrepancies    noted    above 

entirely  vanish,  and  vv.   11-23  become  a  clear  and 

connected  account  of  the  trial  and  conviction  of  Jere- 

^  See  Supplementary  Note. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  37 

miah.  In  regard  to  the  defence  by  some  of  the  ciders,  it 
may  be  well  to  remark  that  this  passus  furnishes  an 
excellent  illustration  of  one  of  the  most  vexing  pecul- 
iarities of  biblical  style,  viz.,  the  tendency  of  the  writer 
to  disregard  rigid  sequence  and  formal  transitions.^ 
Thus  our  author  does  not  consider  it  necessary  to 
mention  that  the  defence  by  the  elders  was  fruitless; 
he  goes  on  abruptly  to  relate  the  coincident  and 
similar  case  of  Urijah,  and  just  adds  in  conclusion  that 
Jeremiah  escaped  execution  through  the  protection 
extended  him  by  Ahikam.  Not  by  any  means  is 
Chap.  XXVI,  as  Giesebrecht  would  have  it,  the  slip- 
shod work  of  an  inferior  author;-  it  is  a  dramatic  and 
altogether  topical  specimen  of  Oriental  narration. 

3.    JEREML\n's   ESCAPE — THE   READING   OF   HIS 
PROPHECIES   BY   BARUCH 

Regarding  the  protection  of  the  prophet  by  Ahikam, 
one  must  conclude  that  the  latter  managed  to  spirit 
Jeremiah  away  to  some  place  where  he  could  remain 
in  safe  hiding  from  the  people.  Had  his  whereabouts 
been  known,  he  would  no  doubt  have  been  seized  and 
executed  like  Urijah,  who,  as  vv.  20-23  relate,  was 
brought  back  from  Egypt  and  put  to  death. 

It  would  be  futile  to  speculate  how  Ahikam  suc- 
ceeded in  spiriting  Jeremiah  away  after  he  had  been 
sentenced  to  death.  History  offers  examples  without 
number  of  political  and  religious  offenders'  escaping 
after  having  been  sentenced  to  death,  and  Jeremiah's 

^  See  my  article,  "The  Presentation  of  Biblical  Stories  to  Children," 
in  "The  Biblical  World,"  XXV,  (1910),  393f.,  and  infra,  Chap.  IV, 
§4. 

^  See  op.  cil.  prefatory  remarks  to  Chap.  XXVJ 


38  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

escape  after  his  conviction  is  hardly  more  surprising 
than  Urijah's  flight  to  Eg}^t  after  the  King  and 
Sarim  had  given  peremptory  orders  that  he  be  put  to 
death  on  the  ground  of  the  precedent  estabHshed  by 
Jeremiah's  conviction.^ 

Substantial  support  of  our  theory  that  Jeremiah  was 
helped  to  a  place  of  safety  by  Ahikam  is  furnished  by 
Chap.  XXXVI,  which,  as  stated  above,  records  how 
in  the  4th  year  of  Jehojakim's  reign  Jeremiah  had 
Baruch  b.  Nerijah  write  down  all  the  prophecies  he  had 
delivered  up  to  that  time,  and  read  them  before  the 
people  assembled  from  all  quarters  of  the  country 
in  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem.    When  the  Sarim  were 

^  Ahikam's  motive  in  rendering  protection  to  Jeremiah  admits  of 
only  one  explanation,  viz.,  that  he  must  have  been  a  personal  follower 
of  Jeremiah,  even  as  was  Baruch  b.  Nerijah,  who  risked  his  life  by 
reading  Jeremiah's  prophecies.  There  is  no  basis  for  Erbt's  view  that 
Ahikam's  protection  of  the  prophet  was  but  an  instance  of  the 
friendly  attitude  of  the  family  of  Shafan  toward  the  prophet  (see 
op.  cit.  6f.,  i2f.,  also  37).  The  fact  that  Jeremiah's  prophecies  were 
read  by  Baruch  from  the  chamber  of  Germajah  b.  Shafan  (XXXVI, 
10)  is  to  be  considered  altogether  accidental;  it  has  no  more  weight 
than  the  other  fact  that  JNIicajah,  Germajah's  son,  did  not  interrupt 
Baruch's  reading.  Police-permission  for  and  police-supervision  of 
public  speakers,  such  as  exist  in  present-day  Germany,  were  unknown 
in  those  days.  As  to  Micajah,  what  throws  real  light  on  his  at- 
titude toward  both  Baruch  and  Jeremiah  is  the  fact  that  he  thought 
it  his  duty  to  report  the  occurrence  to  the  Sarim.  Thereby  he  showed 
— as  did  in  their  turn  the  Sarim  by  their  subsequent  report  to  the 
King — that  he  considered  the  reading  of  Jeremiah's  prophecies  an 
affair  calling  for  action  on  the  part  of  the  authorities.  Had  he  been 
friendly  disposed  toward  Jeremiah  he  certainly  would  not  have 
reported  the  matter.  Micajah's  object  in  hstening  to  Baruch  to  the 
end  was  no  doubt  the  same  as  that  of  both  the  Sarim  and  the  King 
in  ordering  that  the  scroll  be  read  to  them — he  simply  wished  to  as- 
sure himself  as  to  whether  the  public  reading  constituted  a  religious 
offence. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  39 

informed  of  this  occurrence  by  Micajah,  they  sum- 
moned Baruch  to  read  the  scroll  to  them,  and  verse  17 
relates  that,  as  soon  as  he  had  finished  reading,  they 
asked  liim,  "How  didst  thou  come  to  write  down  all 
these  words?"  ^  Verse  18  gives  Baruch's  guarded 
answer:  ''He  dictated  all  these  words  to  me."  Now 
the  Sarim  knew  that  it  was  Jeremiah's  prophecies 
which  Baruch  had  been  reading  to  them,  for  apart 
from  the  fact  that  the  Temple-sermon  was  among 
them  -  (note  v.  2,  "And  write  therein  ^  all  the  words 
that  I  have  spoken  unto  thee  .  .  .  from  the  day  I 
revealed  myself  unto  thee  in  the  days  of  Josiah  even 
unto  this  day"),  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  even  as 
in  the  present  Book  of  Jeremiah,  so  in  the  first  col- 
lection, several  prophecies,  notably  the  consecration 
vision  (note  particularly  verse  11)  and  the  opening 
prophec}%  Chap.  XXV,ifiF.,  contained  direct  evidence 
that  they  were  Jeremiah's  words  (note  verse  3  of 
Chap.  XXV,  and  cf.  infra,  §4,  "Chap.  XXV;  its 
Origin  and  Purpose").  If  the  Sarim  had  not  known 
that  Jeremiah  was  the  author,  Baruch  would  neces- 
sarily have  mentioned  Jeremiah's  name  in  v.  18  in- 
stead of  merely  referring  to  him  as  he.  Their  ques- 
tion, expressing,  as  it  does,  surprise  and  a  certain 
curiosity  as  to  how  Baruch  came  to  write  down 
Jeremiah's  prophecies,  is,  doubtless,  to  be  explained 
by  the  fact  that  Jeremiah's  whereabouts  were  un- 

^mipphi,  not  read  by  the  LXX,  is  clearly  dittography  of  mippiu 
of  the  following  verse. 

2  Although  the  Sarim  were  not  present  when  Jeremiah  delivered  the 
Temple-sermon,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  they  were  familiar  with 
the  contents  of  the  sermon  from  the  proceedings  at  the  trial  four 
years  before. 

'  Read,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX  and  also  v.  18,  ^alalia  instead 
of  'clceha. 


40  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

known  to  them  at  the  time.  It  will  be  noticed  how 
appropriate  under  the  circumstances  was  Baruch's 
answer,  how  little  real  information  it  conveyed  to  his 
questioners:  "He  dictated  all  these  words  to  me,  and 
I  wrote  them  in  the  scroll  with  ink."  Lekh  hissather 
'attd  ufjinnfjahu  of  v.  19  (usually  translated  "Go, 
hide  thee,  thou  and  Jeremiah!")  is  in  no  wise  con- 
tradictory to  the  preceding  w.,  as  it  may  just  as  cor- 
rectly be  translated,  "Go,  hide  thou  with  Jeremiah" 
or  "even  as  Jeremiah!" — in  fact  tliis  is  the  more 
accurate  translation.^ 

Further,  the  theory  that  Jeremiah  was  hidden  by 
Ahikam  throws  light  on  'asur  (v.  5),  which  hitherto  has 
not  been  satisfactorily  explained.  To  take  "^ni  'asur 
as  meaning  "I  am  prevented  by  rituahstic  unclean- 
liness  "  is  excluded,  as  Giesebrecht  and  Cornill  rightly 
point  out,^  for  as  v.  9  shows,  there  was  an  interval  of 
several  months  ^  between  the  time  Jeremiah  arranged 
with  Baruch  for  the  dictation  and  reading  of  his 
prophecies  and  the  date  when  Baruch  actually  read 
them  in  the  Temple,  and  Jeremiah  could  not  possibly 
have  foreseen  several  months  ahead  that  he  would  be 

^  Cf.  the  similar  force  of  w«  in  Num.  XVI,  18,  timoscB,  Gen.  I,  16 
•w^'eth  hakkokhahhlm,  et  alii. 

2  Op.  ciL,  ad  loc. 

^  The  exegetes  have  wrongly  inferred  from  v.  9  that  a  year's  time 
must  have  elapsed  between  Jeremiah's  summoning  Baruch  and  Bar- 
uch's reading  Jeremiah's  prophecies  in  the  Temple.  They  have  over- 
looked the  fact  that  in  reckoning  the  King's  reign  the  autumnal  era  is 
followed  (in  accordance  with  the  usage  prevailing  throughout  pre- 
exilic  times  and  adhered  to  elsewhere  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah),  while 
in  determining  the  date  of  the  fast  by  the  month  of  the  year,  the 
vernal  era  is  followed,  as  is  evident  from  the  statement  in  v.  22, 
"  the  King  was  sitting  in  his  winter-residence  with  the  burning  brazier 
before  him."  Jeremiah  summoned  Baruch,  no  doubt,  in  the  last 
months  of  the  4th  year  of  Jehojakim's  reign. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  41 

prevented  by  ritualistic  uncleanliness  from  appearing 
in  the  Temple  himself.  The  phrase,  '"ni  'asur 
(usually  translated  "I  am  shut  up"),  it  is  safe  to 
conclude,  simply  means  "I  am  in  hiding" — a  meaning 
which  will  not  seem  at  all  farfetched  if  one  considers 
that  when  in  enforced  hiding,  one  is  not  less  confined 
than  when  imprisoned,  'asur  seems  to  have  this 
meaning  also  in  I  Chron.  XII,  i,  as  may  be  concluded 
from  the  analogous  mistattcr  of  I  Sam.  XXIII,  19, 
XXVI.  I,  as  well  as  from  the  rendering  of  the  LXX, 
avve')(^ojjLevov. 

In  the  light  of  these  probable  facts,  Jehojakim's 
action  on  hearing  the  recital  of  Jeremiah's  prophecies 
by  Baruch  falls  into  its  proper  perspective.  It  has 
been  explained  as  the  arbitrary  act  of  an  autocratic 
ruler,  but  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  King  could  not  well 
have  acted  otherwise.  The  death-sentence  would  long 
since  have  been  executed  against  Jeremiah  had  his 
hiding-place  been  known,  and  now  that  there  seemed 
a  possible  clue  to  his  whereabouts,  the  King  was  bound 
to  order  that  he  be  captured  and  put  to  death  forth- 
with. That  Baruch  was  included  in  this  order  is 
easily  explained,  for,  inasmuch  as  the  Temple-sermon 
was  among  the  prophecies  read  by  him,  he  had  clearly 
incriminated  himself ,  and,  like  Urijah,  had  laid  himself 
open  to  summary  punishment. 

The  King's  burning  of  the  scroll  was  likewise  a 
perfectly  logical  procedure.  Jehojakim  simply  wished, 
in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  the  law,  Deut.  XVIII, 
15-22,  to  destroy  all  trace  of  Jeremiah's  prophecies. 
To  reason  with  Duhm,^  who  concludes  from  v.  16 
that  the  Sarim  were  impressed  by  the  reading  of 

1  Op.  cil.,  ad  loc. 


42  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Jeremiah's  prophecies/  and  that  the  King  meant  to 
show  that  he  could  not  be  thus  impressed,  is  to  view 
those  remote  ages  through  the  spectacles  of  modern 
times.  As  a  matter  of  fact  there  is  in  this  chapter  no 
real  support  for  the  theory  that  the  Sarim  were  im- 
pressed by  Jeremiah's  prophecies.  For  since  verse  24 
expressly  states,  "But  the  King  and  his  officials  who 
heard  all  these  words  feared  not,  neither  did  they  tear 
their  garments,"  it  follows  either  that  paJfdu  'is  'ael 
reeu  of  v.  16  must  mean,  "they  turned  to  one  another 
amazed,"  or  "horrified",^  not,  as  usually  translated, 
"they  turned  to  one  another  in  fear"  (one  can  easily 
beheve  that  the  Sarim  were  indeed  shocked  by  the 
temerity  of  Jeremiah  and  Baruch),^  or  that  in  accord- 
ance with  avv€/3ov\€vaavTo  of  the  LXX  the  text 
originally  read  no^'su,  "they  consulted  together," 
instead  of  palfdu.  Verse  25,  "Elnathan,  Delajah, 
and  Gemarjah  even  urged  the  King  not  to  burn  the 
scroll,  but  he  did  not  Hsten  unto  them,"  cannot  be 
cited  in  proof  that  Jeremiah's  prophecies  made  an 
impression  on  the  Sarim — or  at  least  on  some  of 
them — for  the  indications  are  that  the  Masoretic  text 
is  not  correct.  The  LXX  read  just  the  opposite: 
Kal  ^XvaOav  .  .  ,  vireOevro  tw  /SacrtXel  tt/oo?  to  Kara- 
Kava-ai  to  x^'P'^^ov^  "Elnathan  .  .  .  urged  the  King  to 
burn  the  scroll.''  Note  that  not  only  is  the  negative 
lacking  in  the  reading  of  the  LXX,  but  also  the  follow- 
ing clause,  "but  he  did  not  listen  to  them."    This  read- 

^  Duhm  not  only  draws  this  conclusion  from  v.  16,  but  he  arbitrarily 
emends  v.  18  to  accord  with  it. 

^Cf.  Gen.  XLII,  28,  wajjaehaerdu  'is  'ael  'ahlu,  "  and  startled  they 
turned  to  one  another." 

*  This  is  approximately  also  Giesebrecht's  interpretation;  see  op. 
di.,  ad  loc. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  43 

ing  of  the  LXX  is  clearly  the  only  reading  that  is  con- 
sistent with  the  preceding  verse  24:  "But  neither  the 
King  nor  his  servants  ^  that  heard  all  these  words 
showed  fear,  or  rent  their  garments."  It  is  safe  to  con- 
clude, therefore,  that  the  original  text  of  v.  25  did  not 
read  Vhhilli  s'roph,  "not  to  burn,"  but  lisroph,  "to 
burn,"  and  that-ct'70  ^ania'  '"IcJiaefnwas  not  added  until 
after  bilti  had  crept  in.  This  conclusion  is  further  con- 
firmed by  the  gam,  "even."  In  urging  the  King  to 
burn  the  scroll,  Elnathan,  Delajah,  and  Gemarjah 
were  impelled  by  the  same  motive  as  the  King  was 
in  burning  it,  i.  c,  by  the  desire  to  have  all  trace  of  the 
sacrilegious  work  destroyed.  This  would  leave  no 
ground  for  the  assumption  that  the  Sari??t  took  the 
part  of  Jeremiah  and  Baruch:  for  the  only  remaining 
passage  on  which  such  an  inference  could  be  based  is 
V.  19,  and  this  verse  might  just  as  easily  have  the 
opposite  meaning  from  that  which  it  is  supposed  to 
have.  The  Sarim's  rejoinder  on  Baruch's  clever 
refusal  to  betray  Jeremiah's  whereabouts  may  well 
have  been,  and  very  probably  was,  not  a  piece  of 
sincere  advice,  but  an  ironical  retort — "Go,  hide  thou 
with  Jeremiah,  and  let  no  one  know  where  ye  are."- 
Regarding  the  persecution  which  Jeremiah  met 
with  from  the  nation  at  large,  it  is  clear  from  the 
foregoing  analysis  that  Jehojakim's  alleged  hostile 
attitude  was  no  factor  in  it.  Contrary  to  the  prevail- 
ing opinion,  it  was  not  Jehojakim's  example  that  fired 

^  I  advisedly  follow  the  reading  of  the  LXX,  which  omits  kol  of 
kol  "^badaii,  "any  of  his  servants;"  whether  one  reads  kol  or  not  is 
immaterial,  since  it  is  here,  as  frequently  elsewhere,  pleonastic. 

^  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  mention  that  there  is  no  justification 
for  either  Cornill's  translation,  "niemand  darf  wissen,"  or  Giese- 
brecht's,  "niemand  wisse." 


44  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

the  people  to  hostility  toward  the  prophet  when  his 
prophecies  were  read  by  Baruch  in  the  Temple.  Their 
persecution  of  Jeremiah  started  with  his  Temple- 
sermon— in  fact  was  the  direct  result  of  it.  The  Temple- 
sermon  it  was  which  formed  the  decisive  event  in  the 
prophet's  career.  It  marked  the  parting  of  the  ways. 
In  it  Jeremiah  mercilessly  attacked  what  the  people 
felt  to  be  their  hohest  beliefs  and  institutions,  and 
mocked  at  the  hollowness  of  their  worship.  They,  on 
their  side,  were  convinced  that  he  was  a  dangerous 
man,  a  false  prophet,  according  to  the  Deuteronomic 
standard  (Deut.  XVIII,  15-22),  and  from  that  moment 
every  man's  hand  was  against  him.  From  that  time 
on  he  was  forced  to  remain  in  hiding  with  the  death- 
sentence  hanging  over  his  head.  Only  with  the  death 
of  Jehojaldm  and  the  accession  of  a  new  king  was  this 
sentence,  we  must  assume,  abrogated,  and  only  then 
did  it  become  safe  for  the  prophet  to  appear  in  pubHc 
again. 

Cornill's  idea  that  Jeremiah  preached  publicly 
during  the  second  part  of  Jehojakim's  reign  cannot  be 
substantiated;  he  bases  his  view  on  Chap.  XV,  10, 
15-21  and  on  Chap.  XXXV. ^  In  regard  to  the  former 
I  am  of  Cornill's  opinion,  that  it  dates  from  the  time 
of  Jehojakim,  but  from  the  first  part  of  Jehojakim's 
reign  instead  of  the  second,  i.  e.,  from  the  time  be- 
tween Jeremiah's  condemnation  to  death  and  the 
reading  of  his  prophecies  by  Baruch.  (Cornill,  who, 
with  the  rest  of  the  biblical  scholars,  thinks  that 
Jeremiah's  persecution  started  with  the  latter  event, 
necessarily  places  the  confession  after  this  occurrence.) 
The  piece  clearly  reflects  the  fanatical  persecution 

1  See  op.  ciL,  Chap.  XXXVI,  26,  Chap.  XV,  21,  and  Chap.  XXXV, 
and  Einleitung,  pp.  XXXf .,  XLf. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  45 

which  Jeremiah  had  to  endure  from  the  whole  nation 
in  consequence  of  his  Temple-sermon,  preached  in  the 
first  year  of  Jehojakim's  reign.  The  point  is,  however, 
that  it  is  not  a  sermon  that  was  delivered  pubUcly, 
but  is  a  confession  never  intended  for  public  delivery — 
a  passionate  outburst  of  the  prophet's  soul  to  God, 
a  bitter  review  of  his  suffering  and  isolation,  conclud- 
ing with  a  burst  of  faith  and  exultant  confidence  in 
God's  aid.  There  is  nothing  in  this  confession  to 
indicate  Jeremiah's  public  activity  at  that  time, 
nothing  to  justify  Cornill's  remark:  "The  speaker  is  a 
man  who  works  with  the  fullest  publicity,  and  who 
moves  about  freely  in  the  world.  He  stands  in  the 
very  midst  of  life,  whose  current  at  the  moment 
threatens  to  engulf  him." 

In  regard  to  Chap.  XXXV,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  the  date  given  in  the  heading,  v.  i,  cannot  be 
accepted,  for  v.  11  states  expressly  that  the  flight  of 
the  Rechabites  to  Jerusalem,  shortly  after  which 
Jeremiah  delivered  this  prophecy,  took  place  at  the 
time  of  Nebuchadrezzar's  approach  to  the  country. 
Nebuchadrezzar's  first  appearance  in  the  country, 
however,  did  not  happen  until  after  the  death  of 
Jehojakim,^  hence  the  earliest  date  of  the  prophecy 
would  be  the  reign  of  Jehojachin. 

'  The  recognition  of  Nebuchadrezzar's  suzerainty  by  Jchojakim, 
mentioned  II  Ki.  XXIV,  i,  was  not  the  result  of  a  military  expedition 
by  Nebuchadrezzar  into  Judah,  but  of  his  decisive  victory  over  Pharao 
Necho  at  Karkemish  and  his  consequent  control  over  Syria.  II  Ki. 
XXIV,  I  is  fragmentary,  the  original  text  having  no  doubt  contained 
a  statement  about  Pharao  Necho's  defeat  (note  v.  7);  see  Benzinger, 
"Die  BUcher  der  Konige"  (in  Marti's  HC),  ad  loc.  and  also  "Die 
Biicher  der  Chronik  "  ib.  on  II  Chron.  XXXVI,  5-8. 


46  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

4.   CHAPTER  XXV— ITS   ORIGIN  AND   PURPOSE 

Chapter  XXV  cannot  be  taken  as  a  proof  that 
Jeremiah  had  appeared  in  pubHc  earlier  in  the  year  in 
which  he  dictated  his  prophecies  to  Baruch.  Verse  3, 
as  Rothstein  points  out  (in  Kautzsch^,  prefatory 
remarks  to  Chap.  XXV),  shows  that  this  chapter  has 
some  connection  with  the  record  in  Chap.  XXXVI 
about  the  reading  of  Jeremiah's  prophecies  by  Baruch. 
On  the  ground  of  this,  Rothstein  rightly  concludes 
that  XXV,  3-i3ba  in  their  original  form  were  written 
by  Jeremiah  for  the  distinct  purpose  of  serving  as  an 
introduction  to  the  reading  of  his  prophecies  by  Ba- 
ruch. He  points  out  further  that  only  by  such  an 
assumption  is  light  thrown  on  the  words,  "all  that  is 
written  in  this  book,"  i3ba,  with  which  the  first  part 
of  XXV,  originally  closed  ^— the  book  referred   to 

^The  last  clause  of  v.  13,  "...  which  Jeremiah  prophesied 
against  the  nations,"  is  not  a  part  of  the  original  text  of  XXV,  1-13, 
but,  as  the  LXX  shows,  it  originally  formed  the  heading  of  the  non- 
Jeremianic  oracles  against  the  nations.  Chaps.  XLVI-LI,  which  at 
one  time  must  have  stood  in  the  Masoretic  text,  as  they  still  do  in  the 
LXX,  between  XXV,  1-13  and  isff.  This  is  not  the  place  for  a  de- 
tailed discussion  of  the  authorship  of  Jer.  XLVI-LI— such  a  discus- 
sion must  be  reserved  for  the  second  volume.  In  view  of  the  fact, 
however,  that  Cornill  and  others  claim  the  oracles  of  Chaps.  XLVI- 
XLIX  for  Jeremiah,  and  that  Cornill  holds  in  addition  that  these  were 
delivered  by  Jeremiah  in  605,  shortly  before  he  committed  his  proph- 
ecies to  writing  {op.  ciL,  Einleitung,  p.  XXXI),  it  must  be  pointed  out 
that  apart  from  everything  else,  these  oracles,  all  with  the  exception 
of  the  one  against  the  Philistines,  differ  in  spirit  as  well  as  in  charac- 
ter and  object  so  radically  from  the  prohecies  of  Jeremiah  that  they 
cannot  possibly  be  considered  his  work.  It  may  be  well  to  add  that 
they  differ  no  less  strikingly  from  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah's 
kindred  predecessors,  including  even  those  prophecies  of  Amos  and 
Isaiah  which  predict  judgment  against  other  nations.  To  take  by 
way  of  illustration  the  opening  piece,  XLVI,  2-12,  the  first  of  the 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  47 

being  none  other  than  the  one  spoken  of  in  Chap. 
XXXVI.  Rothstein  points  out  finally  that  XXV,  i5ff. 
in  their  original  form,  /.  c,  vv.  15a,  27,  3ofT.,  formed 
a  fitting  conclusion  to  this  book  of  prophecies  which 
Baruch  read  in  the  Temple.  The  contents  of  the  book, 
i.  c,  the  impending  judgment  which  the  prophet  has 
been  predicting  so  many  years,  is  figuratively  spoken 
of  in  vv.  15,  27  as  the  cup  of  divine  wrath  which  God 
has  bidden  him  hand  around,  while  vv.  3off.  describe 
the  stonn  breaking  over  the  country  from  the  north 
and  carrying  destruction  in  its  wake. 

Rothstein's  view  is  most  convincing,  for  one  can 
hardly  imagine  that  Jeremiah  would  have  Baruch 
read  to  the  people  his  prophecies  of  the  past  without 
dwelling  on  the  circumstances  that  prompted  him 
to  this  step,  and  without  pointing  out  how  present 
events  \dndicate  his  claim  that  he  has  all  these  years 
been  inspired  by  God."^  It  was  in  fact  this  considera- 
tion that  led  me,  independent  of  Rothstein,  to  prac- 
tically the  same  conclusions  regarding  the  origin  and 
purpose  of  Chap.  XXV,  as  also  regarding  the  original 
form  of  w.  i5ff. 

On  the  question  of  the  original  form  of  vv.  1-14, 
Rothstein  advances  no  new  theory.  Biblical  scholars 
are  agreed  that  what  the  Masoretic  text  contains  in 
excess  of  the  LXX  is  the  work  of  an  interpolater, 
and  besides,  that,  even  as  read  by  the  LXX,  v.  12  is 

two  utterances  against  Egypt,  it  will  be  noticed  that  this  piece  is  not 
a  prophecy  at  all,  but  a  chauvinistic  song  of  derision  over  the  defeat 
of  Pharao  Necho  at  Karkemish.  It  shows  no  true  religious  feeling 
whatever.  Jeremiah  could  never  have  produced  anything  of  the 
kind;  to  him,  who  realized  the  seriousness  of  the  situation  after  the 
battle  at  Karkemish,  such  blind  rejoicing  over  Eg>'pt's  defeat  would 
have  seemed  sheer  mockery. 

'  See  also  Part  III,  Chap.  I,  p.  i72f.  and  Chap.  Ill,  §  4,  b,  p.  207. 


48  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

not  original  text.  The  only  point  on  which  opinion 
is  di\dded  is  whether  to  ehminate  as  interpolation  also 
"and  against  all  the  nations  roundabout"  of  v.  9. 
Rothstein  rightly  points  out  in  favor  of  its  elimination 
that,  according  to  w.  3!?.,  11,  13a,  ha  as  well  as  v.  2, 
Jeremiah  clearly  addresses  himself  to  Judah  alone, 
and  also  that,  according  to  all  indications,  the  book  of 
prophecies  read  by  Baruch  contained  predictions  of 
judgment  against  Judah  only. 

In  regard  to  the  original  form  of  i5ff.,  I  agree  fully 
with  Rothstein  except  on  one  point.  I  do  not  consider 
the  whole  of  v.  15b  spurious,  but  only  "all  the 
nations  to  which  I  shall  send  thee."  I  find  that 
Aquila's  reading  of  15b,  Kat  Tronet?  avTov<i,  sub- 
stantiates Rothstein's  view  that  the  whole  passus 
which  pertains  to  the  nations  is  interpolated.  It 
points  to  wViiSqlthd  'otham  ("and  cause  them  to  drink 
it")  as  original  text  ^  instead  of  ivVtisqithd  'otha  ("and 
cause  .  .  .  to  drink  it  "),a.nd  '<?//zaw  ("them")  leaves 
no  room  for  "all  the  nations  to  which  I  shall  send 
thee."  This  clause  must  be  a  later  addition,  and,  this 
being  the  case,  it  is  obvious  that  vv.  17-26  cannot 
have  been  in  the  original  text  either.  Further,  God's 
command  to  Jeremiah  in  v.  27,  "And  tell  them,  thus 
saith  the  Lord  Sabaoth,  drink  to  intoxication  and 
vomit  and  fall  and  rise  no  more  because  of  the  sword 
which  I  am  to  send  among  you,"  would  have  no  sense 
after  \'v.  I7ff.,  which  state  that  Jeremiah  took  the  cup 
from  God's  hand  and  handed  it  round  to  the  nations, 
one  by  one. 

Verse  16,  as  Rothstein  rightly  points  out,  betrays 
itself  at  a  glance  as  the  prosaic  equivalent  of  v.  27, 

^  Tho  object  koS  is  to  be  construed  with  both  the  preceding  verb, 
qah,  and  the  following  verb,  hiSqUhd. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  49 

and  can  have  originated  only  with  the  interpolater. 
Verses  28,  29,  the  prosaic  quahty  of  which  is  equally 
conspicuous,  belong  in  the  same  category  as  15b  ^, 
17-26.  By  placing  vv.  27,  3off.  immediately  after 
"and  cause  them  to  drink  it"  of  v.  15,  we  get  a  highly 
poetic  text  throughout  the  original  second  part  of 
Chap.  XXV.  It  is  not  only  poetic  but  admirably 
suited  to  the  purpose  which  it  was  meant  to  serve, 
that  of  closing  the  reading  of  Jeremiah's  prophecies 
with  a  stirring  picture  of  the  destruction  so  swiftly 
approaching  from  Babylon.^ 

NOTE   ON   THE   DATE   OF   JER.   XVII,    1 9-2  7 

See  Geiger,  "Urschrift  und  Ubersctzung,"  pp.  95f.; 
Kuenen,  "  Historisch-Kritische  Einlcitung  i.  d.  Biicher 
des  Alten  Testaments,"  II,  i67ff.;  and  Cornill,  op. 
cit.,  ad  loc. 

Apart  from  the  striking  similarity  in  spirit  and 
subject-matter  between  Jer.  XVII,  19-27  and  Neh. 

'  In  the  description  of  the  coming  ruin  of  vv.  joff.,  I  find  evidence  of 
the  work  of  the  interpolator  only  in  baggojim  of  v.  31,  which  was 
probably  substituted  for  baggojo  or  ¥'ammd  (similarly  the  Masoretic 
text,  Is.  Ill,  13,  reads  'ammlm  for  original  ^ammo).  In  v.  2>°jos'bhe 
ha'araes  (in  accordance  with  the  parallelism  and  LXX  omit  kol  and 
read  'al  for  'ac/)  means  "the  inhabitants  of  the  land,"  as  follows  from 
'al  fiau'elnl  of  the  parallel  member,  and  accordingly  'ad  q^?e  ha'aracs 
of  the  immediately  following  v.  31  means  "throughout  the  land"  and 
miqse  ha'araes  'u^'ad  q^se  ha'araes  of  v.  33  "from  one  end  of  the  land 
to  the  other"  {cf.  XII,  12),  and  finally  kol  basar  of  v.  31  connotes,  as 
ib.,  XLV,  5,  and  Jo.  Ill,  1,  "all  people"  and  not  "all  mankind." 
As  in  XXXI,  8,  the  countries  of  the  Assyrian-Babylonian  realm  are 
meant  by  mijjark^llie  'araes  of  v.  32;  in  Is.  V,  26,  XLI,  9  the  terms 
q'se,  q'soth,  and  'asile  "limits"  or  "borders"  (which  is  the  meaning 
also  oljark^the),  occur  instead;  these  expressions  find  their  explanation 
in  the  fact  that  for  the  writers  of  those  times  the  .'\ss>Tian-Babylonian 
realm  formed  the  geographical  horizon  to  the  east. 


so  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

XIII,  15-22,  in  which  these  scholars  have  rightly  seen 
proof  that  the  former  is  a  product  of  the  time  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah,  there  are  certain  points  which  indicate 
an  actual  dependence  of  Jer.  XVII,  19-27  on  Neh. 
XIII,  15-22.  It  has  remained  unnoticed,  except  by 
Siegfried,  that  in  both  these  pieces  massa  has  not  the 
meaning  "burden,"  but  the  meaning  "merchandise."  ^ 
This  follows  clearly  in  the  case  of  Neh.  XIII,  15  and 
19  from  the  fact  that  in  v.  15  kol  massd  is  used  as 
a  general  term  to  include  all  the  articles  of  mer- 
chandise that  have  just  been  enumerated,  and  from 
the  further  fact  that  the  injunction,  "no  merchan- 
dise (massd)  shall  come  in  on  the  Sabbath-day,"  in 
V.  19  is  followed  up  in  v.  20  by  the  statement,  "Then 
the  traders  and  the  dealers  in  all  sorts  of  merchandise 
(kol  mimkar)  passed  the  night  outside  of  Jerusalem 
once  or  twice."  Neh.  XIII,  15,  i9f.  throw  light  on 
the  meaning  of  the  word  massd  in  Jer.  XVII,  2 if.  and 
27,  regarding  which  we  would  otherwise  be  in  the 
dark.  That  unhke  the  author  of  Neh.  XIII,  15-22,  the 
author  of  Jer.  XVII,  19-27  did  not  make  it  clear  that 
he  used  massd  with  this  specific  meaning  may  be 
explained  only  in  either  of  the  following  ways — that 
his  address  followed  close  on  Nehemiah's  ordinance,  in 
which  case  he  might  safely  assume  that  his  audience 
would  understand  the  use  of  the  word  massd,  or  that 
he  mechanically  drew  on  Neh.  XIII,  15-22  as  his 
source.  Neh.  XIII,  15-22  throws  Hght  on  another 
obscure  point  of  Jer.  XVII,  19-27,  viz.,  uhJio  Vsa^'^re 
frusalaim  }fj6m  hassahhath  of  v.  27.  Verse  19  of 
the  former,  "And  I  placed  some  of  my  servants  at 
the  gates,  so  that  no  merchandise  should  come  in  on 

'See  "Ezra,  Nehemia  und  Esther"  (in  Nowack's  HK.)  on  Neh. 
XIII,  IS  and  19. 


THE  TEMPLE-SERMON  51 

the  Sabbath  day"  ((^'"Saery  Id  jahho  massd  b'jom 
Jia^abhat/i),  shows  that  massd  immediately  preceding 
jihlio  b'^a'^rc  j'rusdaim  in  Jer.  XVII,  27,  besides  being 
object  of  the  infinitive,  s"cth,  is  to  be  construed  also 
with  bho  as  subject  (for  examples  of  similar  and  con- 
verse construction  cf.  Exod.  XXXII,  24,  rmi  zahabh 
hithparaqii;  I  Ki.  V,  i,  Is.  XLVI,  i3aa,  Prov.  Ill,  21,  d 
alii.).  As  in  Neh.  XIII,  19  so  in  Jer.  XVII,  27  the  ref- 
erence is  to  the  importation  of  merchandise  into  Jeru- 
salem by  foreign  merchants,  and  the  author  of  Jer. 
XVII,  19-27,  in  speaking  or  writing  id'' bliilli  s^'clhrnassd 
iibho  b'Sa'^re  fnlsalaim  b'jom  ha ssabbalh,  "and  not  to 
transport  merchandise  or  to  have  it  come  in  through 
the  gates  of  Jerusalem  on  the  Sabbath-day,"  evidently 
had  in  mind  the  situation  as  described  in  Neh.  XIII, 
15-22,  and  took  it  for  granted  that  this  situation  was 
familiar  to  his  audience  or  readers.  In  view  of  these 
two  facts  which  clearly  point  to  a  close  dependence  of 
Jer.  XVII.  19-27  on  Neh.  XIII,  15-22,  it  is  absolutely 
impossible  to  defend  with  Rothstein  (in  Kautzsch,^ 
ad  lac.)  Jeremiah's  authorsliip  of  XVII,  19-27.  On 
the  other  hand,  in  Jer.  XVII,  19-27,  as  elsewhere,  the 
Sabbath-observance  consists  in  not  carrying  on  busi- 
ness and  not  performing  labor;  Duhm's  remarks 
{op.  oil.)  on  w.  21  and  27  are  without  basis. 


CHAPTER  III 

THE  PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  UNDER 
ZEDEKIAH.  CRITICAL  ANALYSIS  OF  CHAP- 
TERS XXXVII,  XXXVIII,  XXXIV,  XXXII  3b-5, 
XXI 

A.  THE  ACTUAL  FACTS  OF  THE  CASE 

After  the  death  of  Jehojakim,  Jeremiah  was  again 
free  to  appear  in  public,  and  he  seems  to  have  enjoyed 
a  brief  respite  from  persecution.  However,  toward 
the  close  of  Zedekiah's  reign,  during  the  siege  of 
Jerusalem  by  the  Chaldasans,  he  stirred  up  the  wrath 
of  his  countrymen  anew  by  his  insistent  prophesying 
of  doom ;  and  from  that  time  on  he  was  denounced  and 
persecuted  more  vigorously  than  ever;  on  two  occa- 
sions his  life  was  in  imminent  danger. 

The  first  of  these  occasions  was  during  the  early 
stage  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  when  the  siege  was 
raised  for  a  short  time  because  of  the  arrival  of  an 
Egyptian  army  to  relieve  the  city.  While,  presum- 
ably, the  general  rejoicing  over  their  supposed  deliver- 
ance was  at  its  height,  Jeremiah  appeared  in  the  peo- 
ple's midst,  and  scoring  them  for  their  breach  of  faith, 
pronounced  their  victory  a  mockery.  The  particular 
action  which  had  so  outraged  the  prophet's  sense  of 
justice  was  their  conduct  in  regard  to  the  serfs.  These 
by  proclamation  of  Zedekiah  had  been  set  free  shortly 
after  the  siege  had  begun,  in  order,  no  doubt,  that 
they  might  be  made  use  of  in  fighting  the  enemy. 
In  accordance  with  the  custom  of  the  time,  their  lib- 

52 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  53 

eration  had  even  been  ratified  by  a  solemn  religious 
act.  but  no  sooner  had  the  siege  been  raised  than  the 
serfs  were  again  enslaved.  Jeremiah  considered  this 
nothing  short  of  arrant  treachery,  and  to  the  govern- 
ment and  the  people  who  were  responsible  for  it,  he 
predicted  utter,  inevitable  ruin,  and  this  in  spite  of 
their  present  triumph  in  driving  back  the  Chalda?ans. 
He  closed  his  prediction:  "Even  should  ye  destroy 
the  whole  army  of  the  Chaldasans  fighting  against 
you  until  only  the  massacred  be  left,  these  will  rise  in 
their  tents,  man  by  man,  and  burn  down  the  city" 
(XXXIV,  8-22,  XXXVII,  7b-io). 

In  the  eyes  of  the  Sarim,  no  doubt,  this  attack  was 
both  seditious  and  inflammatory,  so  that  when,  shortly 
after,  Jeremiah  was  about  to  leave  Jerusalem  for  his 
home-\illage,  Anathoth  (for  what  purpose  is  not  clear, 
owing  to  the  obscurity  of  the  phrase,  laJflaq  miSam 
Vt/iokh  ha' am  of  XXXVII,  12),  he  was  summarily 
seized  on  the  pretext  that  he  meant  to  desert  to  the 
Chalda^ans,  and  without  the  semblance  of  a  trial  was 
flogged  and  thrown  into  a  dungeon.  Here  he  was  held 
"for  a  long  time,"  and  here  he  would  probably  have 
died  if  the  King,  acceding  to  his  request,  had  not 
finally  changed  the  sentence  to  imprisonment  in  the 
court  of  guard  (XXXVII,  11-21). 

As  prisoner  in  the  court  of  guard,  Jeremiah  enjoyed 
a  certain  amount  of  freedom  in  that  he  was  allowed 
to  hold  intercourse  with  other  people,  but  by  this  very 
Hberty  he  soon  imperilled  his  life  anew.  The  Chal- 
da^ans  had  again  laid  siege  to  Jerusalem  (it  was  be- 
cause of  this  that  he  had  been  summoned  by  Zedekiah 
from  the  dungeon  for  a  secret  interview  ^),  and  he 

1  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  Chaldaeans  had  renewed  the  siege  of 
Jerusalem  at   the   time  Zedekiah  summoned  Jeremiah   from    the 


54  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

felt  prompted  to  a  new  utterance.  In  spite  of  all  his 
experiences  in  the  past,  he  could  not  keep  silent.  He 
declared  that  the  nation  was  irrevocably  doomed,  and 
drastically  told  the  people  engaged  in  fighting  the 
enemy  that  their  attempt  to  defend  the  capital  was 
hopeless,  that  the  city  must  fall  into  the  hands  of  the 
Chaldasans  and  every  soul  therein  perish,  whether 
by  the  sword,  by  famine,  or  by  pestilence;  only  those 
who  should  desert  to  the  Chaldseans  might  escape. 

The  Sarim,  some  of  whom  heard  these  words,  saw 
in  them  an  act  of  treason,  and  after  receiving  carte 
blanche  from  Zedekiah,  they  decided  to  get  rid  of  him 
for  good  by  throwing  him  into  a  miry  cistern  in  the 
fortress.  In  this  extreme  case  he  would  certainly  have 
perished  in  a  short  time  ^  but  for  the  Ethiopian  eunuch, 
Ebed-Melech,  who  obtained  permission  of  Zedekiah  to 
go  to  his  rescue,  and  who  with  difficulty  had  him 
extracted  from  the  cistern.    Jeremiah  was  thus  saved 

dungeon,  for  otherwise  Jeremiah  could  not  have  asked,  "WTiere  are 
now  your  prophets  who  prophesied  iinto  you,  'The  King  of  Babylon 
shall  not  descend  upon  this  city?"  (XXX\T:I,  19). 

^  In  XXXVIII,  9  not  only  kl  'en  hallaehaem  'od  hair  but  also  mip- 
p^ne  haraahh  is  undoubtedly  an  interpolation,  for  Zedekiah's  words 
to  Ebed-jNIelech,  "get  Jeremiah  out  of  the  cistern  before  he  dies" 
(v.  10),  show  that  Jeremiah  was  in  imminent  peril.  Had  the  danger 
been  that,  in  the  distribution  of  the  daily  rations  to  the  hungry 
masses,  Jeremiah  down  in  the  pit  might  be  overlooked  and  might 
starve  to  death,  there  would  have  been  no  need  for  instantaneous 
action.  The  great  necessity  for  haste  admits  of  but  one  explanation, 
viz.,  that  the  danger  facing  Jeremiah  was  that  he  might  sink  beyond 
recover^'  in  the  miry  bottom  of  the  cistern.  This  is  further  borne  out 
by  the  description  of  his  rescue.  Evidently  it  was  hard  work  to  get 
him  out — no  doubt  because  of  the  suction  of  the  mire — and  it  was 
necessary  to  take  precautions  to  prevent  the  strain  of  the  pulling  from 
injuring  him.  li'ajjamoth  tahtdu  "that  he  might  die  right  there,"  is 
perfect  text,  the  apocopate  consecutive  expressing  here  the  avowed 
intention  of  the  Sarim  in  throwing  Jeremiah  into  the  cistern. 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  55 

from  what  had  seemed  certain  death,  but  he  was  not 
set  at  liberty.  He  remained  imprisoned  in  the  court 
of  guard  until  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  (XXXIV,  1-3, 
XXXII,  3b-5,  XXI,  4-14,  XXXVIII,  1-13,  28a). 

B.    CRITICAL  ANALYSIS   OF   THE    PROPHECIES   AND 
BIOGRAPHICAL   RECORDS   OF   THE   PERIOD 

The  above  presentation  of  events  is  based  on  a 
critical  analysis  of  the  biographical  chapters  XXXVII 
and  XXXVIII  and  of  the  pieces  correlated  with  these, 
viz.,  XXXIV,  8-22  with  XXXVII,  and  XXXIV,  1-7, 
XXXII,  3b-5,  XXI,  1-14  with  XXXVIII.  Inasmuch 
as  in  these  two  groups  authentic  records  have  become 
interfused  with  legendary  tales,  the  analysis  which 
follows  will  necessarily  aim  to  sift  out  the  legendary 
from  the  authentic  in  addition  to  estabHshing  the 
correlation  between  the  various  parts. 

I.  xxxvn,  17-21  AND  XXXVIII,  14-27 

Each  piece  relates  a  secret  interview  of  Zedekiah 
with  Jeremiah.  Both  accounts  have  hitherto  been 
considered  authentic,  and  accordingly,  it  has  always 
been  taken  for  granted  that  Zedekiah  twice  sum- 
moned Jeremiah  for  a  secret  interview,  the  first  time, 
while  Jeremiah  was  imprisoned  in  the  dungeon  of 
Jonathan's  house,  and  the  second,  after  his  rescue 
from  the  miry  cistern.  This  point  has  never  been 
questioned,  but  a  critical  examination  shows  beyond 
a  doubt  that  the  account,  XXXVIII,  14-27,  is  but 
another  version  of  the  interview  related  in  XXXVII, 
17-21. 

The  key  to  the  situation  is  found  in  Zedekiah's 
suggestion  to  Jeremiah  in  XXXVIII,  26  that,  if 
interrogated    about    the    interview    by    the    Sarim, 


$6  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

he  should  answer:  "I  presented  to  the  King  my 
petition  that  he  would  not  send  me  back  to  the 
house  of  Jonathan  to  die  there."  Now  during  his 
interview  with  Zedekiah  while  imprisoned  in  the 
dungeon  of  Jonathan's  house,  Jeremiah  actually  did 
present  such  a  request  to  Zedekiah,  and  in  practically 
those  identical  words  (cf.  XXXVII,  20);  while,  after 
his  rescue  from  the  miry  cistern,  he  did  not  make 
such  a  request,  nor  is  there  anywhere  the  slightest 
reference  to  a  design  on  the  part  of  the  Sarim  or  the 
King  to  return  him  to  the  dungeon  of  Jonathan's 
house,  or  for  that  matter  to  any  other  dungeon. 
Which  of  the  two  accounts,  however,  is  the  authentic 
record  and  which  the  legendary  product  of  a  later 
age,  is  not  difficult  to  decide. 

(a)  XXXVIII,   14-27 — THE  LEGENDARY  ACCOUNT 

Both  from  a  psychological  and  from  a  historical 
point  of  view  the  account,  XXXVIII,  14-27,  is  ficti- 
tious. Note  in  the  former  regard  how  Zedekiah  urges 
Jeremiah  not  to  withhold  anything  from  him  (v.  14) — 
as  if  it  were  Jeremiah's  habit  to  refrain  from  speaking 
his  mind.  Note  further  how  Jeremiah  shrinks  from 
answering  Zedekiah  for  fear  that  Zedekiah  may  kill 
him  if  he  replies.  In  fact  he  does  not  speak  until  after 
Zedekiah  has  assured  him  under  oath  that  he  will 
neither  kill  him  himself,  nor  deliver  him  into  the 
hands  of  those  men  who  seek  his  Ufe  (w.  isf.).  The 
real  Jeremiah  knew  no  such  fear;  he  had  absolutely 
no  regard  for  the  consequences  of  his  words.  In  fact 
he  was  only  too  ready  to  declare  his  mind  on  all 
occasions,  and  without  doubt  he  would  have  told  the 
truth  bluntly  to  the  Sarim  had  he  been  questioned  by 
them.    However,  the  picture  of  the  Sarim,  consumed 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  57 

with  curiosity  regarding  their  interview,  which  we 
receive  from  the  King's  admonition  to  Jeremiah,  and 
more  especially  the  feature  that  the  King  foresees  this 
curiosity  and  forewarns  Jeremiah,  bear  the  unmis- 
takable stamp  of  the  legendary.  It  is  safe  to  assert 
that  Jeremiah's  supposed  mendacity,  which  has  called 
forth  such  ingenious  apology  from  modern  exegetes, 
belongs  altogether  in  the  realm  of  the  mythical. 

Logically  considered,  the  Sarifu's  curiosity  regarding 
what  Jeremiah  secretly  said  to  the  King  is  absurd,  in 
\-iew  of  the  contemptuous  attitude  of  the  people  in 
general  toward  Jeremiah.  He  was  looked  upon  as  a 
nuisance,  and  his  prophecies  held  to  be  the  utterances 
of  a  madman  {cf.  XXIX,  26),  even  as  those  of  the 
other  literary  prophets  had  been  considered  in  their 
day.  The  only  point  that  concerned  the  authorities 
was  how  to  get  rid  of  him,  or  at  least  how  to  make  him 
quit  his  troublesome  prophesying  of  evil. 

Another  point  which  indicates  the  legendary  char- 
acter of  the  story  is  the  circumstance  that  the  Sarim 
learn  at  once  of  the  interview,  regardless  of  the  fact 
that  it  is  supposed  to  be  a  secret  one.  Such  contradic- 
tions may  almost  invariably  be  detected  in  legendary 
records.  They  are  doubtless  to  be  explained  by  a  de- 
sire on  the  part  of  the  author  to  make  the  story  more 
thrilling  than  the  plain  statement  of  facts  seems  to 
him.  His  iniagination  readily  supplies  the  necessary 
embelhshment,  but  in  seeking  to  improve  on  his  origi- 
nal, he  is  prone  to  overlook  some  detail  which  makes 
his  addition  most  unlikely,  if  not  altogether  impossi- 
ble. In  the  present  case  our  author  betrays  a  lack  of 
appreciation  for  the  most  vital  quality  of  his  original. 
He  has  not  caught  the  true  spirit  of  it.  He  does  not 
see  that  the  effectiveness,  the  ahnost  crushing  force  of 


5  8  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

the  original  narrative  lies  in  its  very  simplicity  and 
directness  (see  infra,  p.  63). 

How  complete  his  lack  of  insight  is  for  the  situa- 
tion he  attempts  to  describe,  is  shown  by  the  couplet, 
V.  22b,  the  greeting  with  which  Jeremiah  tells  Zedekiah 
he  will  be  hailed  by  the  captive  women  of  his  harem, 
when  himself  led  captive  to  the  camp  of  the  Chaldeeans. 
This  couplet  has  of  late  been  taken  as  a  dirge.  In  tone 
it  is,  however,  clearly  derisive,  although  written,  like 
Is.  XIV,  4fif.,  and  XXXVII,  22fif.,  in  the  meter  of 
the  Kinastrophe,  and  Giesebrecht  is  right  in  defending 
the  old  interpretation  of  it  as  a  song  of  derision.^ 

Is  it  credible  that  Jeremiah,  whose  sensitive  soul 
suffered  agonies  at  every  thought  of  his  people's  doom, 
could  have  conceived  such  an  unnatural  and  revolting 
scene  as  is  this  picture  of  the  women  of  the  King's 
harem  coming  forth  to  jeer  at  the  degradation  of  their 
lord  and  King, — those  women  who  had  themselves  been 
taken  as  spoils  of  war  into  the  camp  of  the  enemy  and 
subjected  to  the  humiliation  and  dishonor  invariable 
under  those  circumstances.  A  picture,  so  psycholog- 
ically untrue,  could  not  have  suggested  itself  to  Jere- 
miah. He  would  have  known  instinctively  that  in 
that  hour  of  misery  and  despair  those  women,  however 
frivolous,  would  not  be  in  the  mood  for  derision.  Had 
he  chosen  to  harrow  the  mind  of  the  King  with  a  picture 
of  his  women  on  that  day,  he  would  most  certainly 
have  painted  the  grim  reality,  as  Amos  in  his  prophecy 
to  Amaziah, — ''  Thy  wife  will  be  ravished  in  the  city."  ^ 

1  See  op.  ciL,  adloc. — Erbt's  remark  (in  op.  cit.,  p.  57)  with  reference 
to  the  couplet  that  to  the  King  the  lamentation  "is  bitter  derision" 
is  an  involuntary  acknowledgment  that  the  old  interpretation  is  the 
correct  one. 

*  The  attitude  at  present  prevailing  among  exegetes  toward  certain 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  59 

The  climax  of  absurdity,  however,  is  reached  in 
Jeremiah's  advice  to  Zedekiah  in  vv.  lyf.,  20  and  in 
Zedekiah's  reply,  v.  19.  Taken  by  itself,  v.  17  would 
probabl}'  call  for  no  comment;  it  would  be  taken  as 
meaning  that  Jeremiah  actually  advised  Zedekiah  to 
seek  his  own  safety  as  well  as  the  welfare  of  the  city  by 
surrendering  to  the  Chalda^ans;  but  Zedekiah's  strange 
reply  alters  the  complexion  of  the  whole  passage: 
*'I  am  afraid  of  the  Juda^ans  who  have  deserted 
to  the  Chaldaeans,  lest  they  (/.  e.,  the  Chaldasans) 
deliver  me  into  their  hands  to  be  reviled  by  them." 

Judging  from  this  reply,  one  would  have  to  conclude 
that  Zedekiah  understood  either  of  two  things :  either 
that  Jeremiah  meant  him  to  steal  off  to  the  camp  of  the 
ChaldiEans  and  give  himself  up  like  any  deserter,  or 
that  he  was  ad\'ising  him  to  offer  to  the  Chaldaeans 
that  the  city  be  surrendered  to  them,  in  which  case, 
Zedekiah  reflected,  the  Chaldaeans  would  make  it  a 
condition  that  he,  as  head  of  the  rebellious  forces,  be 
delivered  over  to  them. 

In  either  case,  however,  the  situation  would  be 
absurd.  In  the  first  case,  Zedekiah  would  have  treated 
Jeremiah's  suggestion  with  the  scorn  it  deserved,  in- 
stead of  simply  demurring  with  such  a  ridiculous 
reason.  No  king,  however  great  a  weakhng,  would 
entertain  the  idea  of  entering  the  camp  of  the  enemy 
as  a  deserter.    And  in  the  second  case,  Zedekiah  would 

obvious  discrepancies  in  the  biographic  parts  of  Jeremiah  is  hardly 
compatible  with  exact  methods  of  criticism.  As  a  rule  these  dis- 
crepancies are  disposed  of  lightly  with  the  remark,  "this  but  shows 
that  the  passage  in  question  is  the  work  of  Baruch."  But  even  were 
it  certain  that  the  biographic  portions  are  the  exclusive  work  of  Ba- 
ruch, it  would  be  but  reasonable  to  suppose  that  Baruch  knew  what 
he  was  talking  about,  and  also  that  he  wrote  either  from  personal 
knowledge  or  from  information  received  from  Jeremiah  himself. 


6o  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

have  known  only  too  well,  that  if  the  Chaldaeans 
insisted  upon  the  surrender  of  his  own  person,  it 
would  not  be  to  turn  him  over  to  the  taunts  of  his  com- 
patriots, but  to  cast  him  into  fetters  and  lead  him  in 
triumph  to  their  own  country,  as  was  done  ten  years 
previously  with  Jehojachin.  It  would  have  been  to 
these  indignities  that  Zedekiah's  mind  would  have 
reverted,  and  he  would  undoubtedly  have  told  Jere- 
miah that  he  would  fight  to  the  last  ditch,  and  if 
necessary,  kill  himself  by  his  own  sword  or  hurl  him- 
self into  the  burning  ruins  of  his  palace,  rather  than 
deliver  himself  voluntarily  to  such  a  fate. 

For  Jeremiah's  advice  to  Zedekiah,  the  author  of  the 
story,  XXXVIII,  14-27,  drew  from  the  prophecy 
XXXIV,  1-3  (XXXII,  3b-5),  XXI,  4-14,  which  was 
delivered  by  Jeremiah  while  prisoner  in  the  court  of 
guard.^  His  method  of  using  his  source  illustrates  a 
very  interesting  point,  a  point  which  is  generally  to 
be  noticed  in  legendary  records,  viz.,  that  the  author 
betrays  his  lack  of  historical  understanding  most 
conspicuously  when  he  deviates,  for  deviating  from 
his  source  simply  means  that  he  has  read  his  own 
subjective  interpretation  into  it. 

Thus  Jeremiah,  in  the  prophecy  just  mentioned, 
nowhere  advises  Zedekiah  to  surrender.  Instead,  he 
emphatically  asserts  that  the  city  is  doomed  beyond 
recall,  and  even  so  Zedekiah's  fate  decided — he  will  be 
taken  as  captive  to  Babylon.  No  fighting  against 
the  enemy  can  avail,  since  Yhwh  Himself  is  in  arms 
against  them.  Only  if  they  heeded  God's  word,  he 
declares,  addressing  himself  to  the  royal  house,  might 
they  be  saved  (XXI,  11),  that  is,  as  XXI,  12  defines, 

^  Cf.  infra,  §  2,  where  it  will  also  be  shown  that  XXXIV,  4f.  are  an 
interpolation. 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  6i 

if  they  conformed  to  God's  will  by  the  estabhshment 
of  a  just  government. 

Two  things  are  at  once  clear  from  this  prophecy, 
that  Jeremiah  did  not  cherish  the  remotest  hope  that 
the  nation's  doom  might  be  averted,  and  that  con- 
sequently, in  this  particular  instance  as  throughout 
his  preaching,  he  did  not  mean  to  give  practical  ad- 
vice,^ did  not  even  expect  that  his  words  would  be  of 
any  practical  consequence  for  the  immediate  course  of 
events.  The  latter  point  is  made  quite  clear  by  the 
fact  that  he  follows  up  his  exhortation  to  the  royal 
house  to  introduce  righteous  government  with  the 
renewed  assertion  that  the  city  is  doomed  (XXI,  i3f.)- 
Neither  Jeremiah  nor  his  predecessor  prophets,  it  may 
be  stated  here,  were  concerned  with  the  poUtics  of  the 

'  Chap.  XXVII  cannot  be  cited  in  proof  that  Jeremiah  at  one  time 
did  really  advise  Zedekiah  to  save  the  nation  by  submitting  to  the 
suzerainty  of  Babylon,  for  this  chapter,  it  is  generally  agreed  because 
of  the  contradictions  in  the  text,  has  not  come  down  to  us  in  its  original 
form  but  greatly  interpolated.  The  late  date  of  some  of  the  interpola- 
tions is  shown  by  the  fact  that  the  text  as  read  by  the  LXX  was  as 
yet  free  from  them.  It  is  not  possible  to  reconstruct  the  prophecy  as 
Jeremiah  delivered  it.  It  was  meant,  we  know,  to  explain  his  symbolic 
action  of  wearing  the  yoke  at  the  time  deputies  from  other  Palestinian 
countries  were  counseling  rebellion  against  Babylon.  And  so  much  is 
certain,  that  wilfju  "  and  live,"  at  the  end  of  v.  12  with  the  following 
V.  13  and  also  v.  17  did  not  form  a  part  of  the  original  prophecy. 
These  verses  would  indicate  that  Jeremiah  advised  a  willing  submis- 
sion to  Babylon  in  order  to  prevent  the  nation's  doom,  but  such  ad- 
vice would  be  in  direct  contradiction  to  Jeremiah's  declaration,  vv.i6, 
iSfl.,  that  the  vessels  of  the  Temple  which  were  carried  to  Babylon 
with  Jehojachin  will  not  be  brought  back,  as  their  prophets  prophesy 
to  the  people,  but  rather  that  the  remaining  vessels  which  were  not 
taken  at  that  time,  will  also  be  taken  to  Babylon.  Further  the  verses 
under  discussion  are  not  contained  in  the  LXX,  which  under  the  cir- 
cumstances is  a  clear  indication  that  they  were  added  at  a  very  late 
time. 


62  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

day;  they  had  no  intention  whatever  of  influencing 
the  course  of  pubHc  events.^ 

But  the  author  of  the  story,  XXXVIII,  14-27,  was 
far  from  seeing  Jeremiah  and  his  preaching  in  this 
light.  To  him  Jeremiah  was  the  leader  and  adviser  of 
his  age,  another  Samuel  or  EHjah — a  conception  of 
the  literary  prophets  which  prevails  in  many  quarters 
up  to  our  own  day.  He  saw  in  Jeremiah's  utterance, 
XXXIV,  1-3  (XXXII,  3b-5),  XXI,  4-14,  no  purpose 
other  than  that  of  advising  Zedekiah  to  save  the  city 
by  surrendering  to  the  Chaldaeans ;  and  in  drawing  on 
this  utterance  for  his  own  story  of  the  inter\dew  he 
naturally  gave  it  this  interpretation.  Jeremiah's  real 
advice  to  Zedekiah  escaped  him.  He  was,  doubtless, 
confirmed  in  his  conclusions  by  XXI,  8-10,  where 
Jeremiah,  addressing  himself  to  the  people,  tells  them 
to  cease  their  hopeless  fighting  and  join  the  ranks  of  the 
Chaldaeans — the  bitter  irony  of  these  words  he  nat- 
urally failed  to  notice  (see  infra). 

(b)    XXXVII,    17-21 — THE   AUTHENTIC  RECORD 

To  turn  now  to  the  account  of  the  secret  interview 
between  Zedekiah  and  Jeremiah,  which  is  given 
XXXVII,  17-21,  it  will  be  seen  at  once  how  this 
account  accords  with  Jeremiah's  utterance,  XXXIV, 
1-3  (XXXII,  3b-5),  XXI,  4-14,  in  that  there  is  no 
mention  of  surrender,  nothing  that  could  even  re- 
motely suggest  such  an  idea.  The  scene  is  most 
reahstic,  and  especially  is  the  picture  presented  of  the 
prophet  a  Ufe-hke  one,  corresponding  in  every  way 
to  his  real  character  as  revealed  in  the  various  authen- 
tic situations  throughout  the  book. 

^  These  points  will  occupy  our  attention  more  fully  in  the  chaps. 
"  The  Prophets  believe  the  doom  inevitable." 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  63 

As  to  the  role  played  by  Zedckiah,  history  offers 
numerous  examples  of  kings,  who,  under  similar 
circumstances,  acted  in  precisely  the  same  way. 
Prompted,  no  doubt,  by  the  desperation  of  the  mo- 
ment, rather  than  by  any  high  regard  for  the  prophet's 
authority,  Zedckiah  secretly  summons  Jeremiah,  and 
without  any  preamble  puts  the  question  that  is 
weighing  on  his  soul,  jcS  dahliar  in"cth  jalnvcE,  "Is 
there  a  word  from  Yhwh?  "  With  crushing  directness 
comes  the  prophet's  answer:  jc^  ^  h'jad  maelackh 
babhael  tinnatJicn,  "There  is!  Thou  shalt  be  given  into 
the  hand  of  the  King  of  Babylon." 

The  anxious  question  of  the  King  reveals  the 
seriousness  of  the  situation.  The  return  of  the  Chal- 
daeans  has  filled  him  with  uneasiness  and  tragic  fore- 
bodings, yet  his  heart  is  clamoring  for  hope,  for  a 
word  of  encouragement.  His  official  prophets  stand 
ready  to  reassure  him,  but  their  promises  mean  noth- 
ing to  him.  Have  they  not  all  along  declared  that  it 
would  not  come  to  this,  that  the  Chalda}ans  would 
not  invade  the  country  nor  lay  siege  to  their  capital? 
Had  they  not  pointed  triumphantly  to  the  withdrawal 
of  the  Chalda^ans  on  the  occasion  of  their  previous 
invasion  as  proving  they  were  right?  But  if  Jeremiah, 
who  customarily  prophesied  evil,  who  had  even  then, 
when  the  Chaldasans  retreated,  insisted  they  were  not 
really  gone,  they  would  still  destroy  the  nation — if  he 
should  hold  out  any  hope,  then  indeed  might  he  take 
courage  once  more.  But  the  uncompromising  Jere- 
miah bluntly  tells  him  the  truth,  confirms  his  worst 
fears — "Thou  shalt  be  given  into  the  hand  of  the  King 
of  Babylon." 

Then  referring,  no  doubt,  to  the  turn  in  events 

'Omit,  in  accordance  with   the  LXX,   the   second   wajjdtnaer. 


64  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

which  has  verified  his  previous  prophecies  and  proved 
those  of  the  official  prophets  false,  he  asks,  "What  is 
my  offence  against  thee  and  thy  officials  and  thy 
people,  that  ye  have  thrown  me  into  the  dungeon? 
Where  are  now  your  prophets  who  prophesied  unto 
you,  'The  King  of  Babylon  shall  not  descend  UDon 
this  country.'?" 

At  this  point  Jeremiah  very  naturally  seizes  the 
opportunity,  and  beseeches  the  King  to  release  him 
from  the  dungeon.  And  Zedekiah  under  the  circum- 
stances cannot  well  do  otherwise.  A  Herod,  no  doubt, 
would  deal  differently  with  Jeremiah  for  such  audacity, 
but  then  a  Herod  would  not  have  summoned  the 
prophet  in  the  first  place. 

In  this  light  the  commutation  of  sentence  granted 
to  Jeremiah  by  Zedekiah  has  small  significance.  It 
does  not  show  that  Zedekiah  took  a  personal  interest 
in  the  prophet,  nor  even  that  he  was  in  any  way 
friendly  disposed  toward  him.  Least  of  all  does  the 
interview  as  a  whole  warrant  the  conclusion  generally 
drawn  from  it,  that  at  heart  Zedekiah  inclined  to  the 
course  which  Jeremiah  is  supposed  to  have  urged,  viz. 
that  of  making  peace  with  Babylon,  and  that  it  was 
only  by  the  superior  will  of  the  Sarim  and  their  war- 
party  that  he  was  forced  to  the  opposite  course.  As 
already  pointed  out,  the  strange  inconsistency  which 
Zedekiah  committed  in  summoning  Jeremiah  was  an 
act  of  desperation,  for  which  history  offers  many  strik- 
ing parallels.  We  need  only  recall  the  case  of  Saul 
who,  when  fate  had  turned  against  him,  consulted,  as 
a  last  resort,  the  witch  of  Endor,  although  he  had  pre- 
viously driven  her  and  her  consorts  from  the  country 
and  forbidden  them  the  practice  of  their  art  under 
penalty  of  death. 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  65 

2.   XXXIV,   8-22  AND   XXXVII,    l-i6 — XXXn%    1-7,   XXXII,    3-5, 
XXI,    I-14  AND  XXXVIU,   I-13 

It  was  Comill  who  first  pointed  out  that  the  proph- 
ecy of  Jeremiah  which  was  called  forth  by  the  people's 
flagrant  breach  of  faith  in  reiinslaving  the  serfs 
(XXXIV,  8-22),  and  the  prophet's  subsequent 
imprisonment  in  the  dungeon  on  a  mere  pretext 
(XXXVII,  11-16),  stand  to  each  other  in  the  relation 
of  cause  and  effect.^  The  date  of  that  prophecy,  as 
the  time  immediately  after  the  raise  of  the  siege  of 
Jerusalem  by  the  Chaldaeans,  follows  with  certainty 
from  the  direct  reference  to  this  event  in  XXXIV,  2 if. 
Also  the  record  of  Jeremiah's  imprisonment  in  the 
dungeon  mentions  the  same  event  as  marking  the 
date  of  his  seizure.  And  since  he  could  not  have 
addressed  the  people  from  the  dungeon,  it  is  obvious 
that  his  seizure  and  imprisonment  must  have  followed 
directly  upon  his  dehvering  the  prophecy,  XXXIV, 
8-22.  On  the  ground  of  this  evident  relation  of  the 
two,  Cornill  tried  to  combine  Chap.  XXXVII  with 
the  two  parts  of  XXXIV,  that  is  w.  1-7  and  vv. 
8-22.2  jjjg  attempt  to  combine  them,  however,  was 
unsuccessful,  (i.)  because,  as  already  indicated,  there 
is  no  connection  whatever  between  XXXIV,  1-7  and 
XXXVII  (see  also  infra),  and  (2.)  because  he  failed 
to  see  the  real  relation  between  XXXIV,  8-22  and 
XXXVII,  being  misled  by  the  story  about  the 
deputation  from  Zedekiah,  XXXVII,  3,  7a. 

1  See  op.  cil.  Einleitung,  p.  XXXV,  Chap.  XXXIV,  prefatory  re- 
marks, and  Chap.  XXXVII,  nil. 

2  See  "The  Book  of  Jeremiah"  in  SBOT;  in  his  Commentary, 
"Das  Buch  Jeremia,"  p.  375,  Cornill  himself  expresses  doubt  as  to  the 
correctness  of  his  reconstruction. 


66  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

The  fact  that  all  the  scholars  except  Duhm  consider 
this  story  authentic,  and  also  the  corresponding  one, 
XXI,  1-3,  explains  why  none  of  them  noticed  that  the 
prophecy  referred  to  in  XXXVIII,  1-3  is  none  other 
than  the  one  contained,  though  incompletely,  in 
Chap.  XXI.  E\idently  they  reasoned  that,  after 
Jeremiah  was  put  in  prison  in  order  that  he  might  be 
kept  from  prophes>dng,  it  was  not  hkely  that  the  King 
would  publicly  sohcit  his  opinion,  and  thus  give  him  an 
opportunity  to  prophesy  again;  and  this  reasoning 
led  naturally  to  the  conclusion  that  the  prophecy, 
Chap.  XXI,  must  antedate  Jeremiah's  imprisonment 
in  the  dungeon,^  Duhm  alone  noticed  that  the 
stories  of  the  deputations  from  Zedekiah  to  Jeremiah 
must  be  legendary,-  but  then  in  his  ultra-radicaHsm  he 
declared  Jeremiah's  utterances,  XXXVII,  yb-io  and 
XXI,  4-10,  to  be  likewise  the  product  of  later  times. 

1  Rothstein's  remark  to  XXXWII,  3  (in  Kautzsch^)  justifies  one  in 
assuming  that  there  was  reall}'  such  a  line  of  reasoning  followed  in 
dating  XXI,  iff.  Stade,  following  Ewald,  sought  to  prove,  in  ZATW, 
XII,  277ff.,  that  XXXVII,  i-io  and  XXI,  i-io  have  reference  to  one 
and  the  same  occurrence,  and  consequently  tried  to  combine  XXI, 
I-IO  and  XXXVII,  4-10  into  one  piece.  Giesebrecht  and  Cornill, 
however  {op  cit.,  ad  loc),  rightly  point  out  that  such  a  view  is  impossi- 
ble, since  XXXVII,  4-10  have  reference  to  an  altogether  different 
situation  from  that  described  in  XXI,  i-io.  Erbt  tries  to  uphold 
Ewald's  and  Stade's  view  by  a  most  arbitrary  procedure.  In  the 
first  place  he  omits  from  XXI,  2  everything  that  points  to  a  different 
situation  from  that  of  XXX\H,  4-10,  then  (in  accordance  with  his 
method  in  general)  he  reduces  Jeremiah's  utterances,  XXI,  4-7b  and 
XXXVII,  7b-io  to  less  than  three  verses,  viz.,  XXXVII,  7b,  8,  10, 
and  finally  he  takes  XXI,  8-10  as  a  separate  utterance — an  utterance, 
he  argues,  which  Jeremiah  did  not  make  in  public,  but  secretly,  for 
the  benefit  of  his  political  friends  {op.  cit.,  pp.  43ff.  and  267f.). 

2  See  op.  cit.,  on  Chap.  XXXVII,  3. 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  67 

(a)    the    two    deputations    from    ZEDEKIAH    to    JEREMIAH, 
XXXVII,  3,   7a — XXXI,   1-3 — both  ACCOUNTS  LEGENT)ARY 

In  \-iew  of  the  contemptuous  and  hostile  attitude 
of  both  the  people  and  the  government  toward 
Jeremiah  and  their  disbelief  in  his  prophecies  (see 
above),  it  would  from  the  ver}-  outset  seem  improbable 
that  the  King  publicly  recognized  Jeremiah's  author- 
ity, by  sending  to  him  on  two  critical  occasions  high 
state-officials  to  inquire  w'hat  he  believed  would  be 
the  outcome  of  the  situation. 

A  critical  examination  shows,  in  fact,  that  neither 
in  XXXVII.  3ff.  nor  in  XXI,  if!,  can  the  story  of  the 
deputation  from  Zedekiah  have  been  originally  an 
organic  part  of  the  records. 

In  XXXVII,  3ff.  the  story  betrays  itself  as  a 
legendary  embellishment  by  the  statement  in  v.  3 
that  Zedekiah  sent  the  deputation  for  the  express 
purpose  of  beseeching  Jeremiah  to  pray  to  God  for 
them  {hithpallad-nd  hha^'dcnii  'acljaJnvcB  ^'^lohenu)} 
The  question  immediately  arises,  w^hat  occasion  was 
there  at  that  juncture  for  beseeching  divine  interv^en- 

*  These  words,  which  are  of  basic  significance,  are  entirely  ignored 
by  Comill  in  the  strange  theory  which  he  advances.  Comill  makes 
the  purel}-  arbitrary-  assertion  that  Zedekiah's  real  object  in  sending 
the  deputation  to  Jeremiah,  after  the  danger  was  averted,  was  to  call 
his  attention  to  the  fact  that  he  had  again  been  wrong  in  taking  a 
gloomy  \new  of  the  situation  {op.  cit.,  p.  243).  Had  this  been  the  case, 
there  is  no  reason  whj-  the  author  should  not  have  said  so;  least  of  all 
is  there  any  groimd,  why  he  should  have  stated  an  altogether  different 
reason. 

No  weight,  whatever,  Giesebrecht  to  the  contrary-  (op.  cit.,  ad  loc), 
can  be  attributed  to  the  l^dorsaii,  "to  consult  me,"  of  Jeremiah's 
reply  in  v.  7a.  Such  discrepancies  as  this,  often  much  more  striking 
ones,  are,  as  we  have  already  noticed,  regularly  met  with  in  legendary 
records. 


68  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISR.\EL 

tion?  Had  not  the  Chaldasans  withdrawn,  and  was 
not  all  danger  for  the  present  averted?  The  absurdity 
of  the  Eang's  sending  a  deputation  to  Jeremiah  for  this 
purpose  is  still  more  evident,  when  one  considers  the 
action  of  the  people  in  regard  to  their  serfs.  The 
reenslaving  of  the  serfs  as  soon  as  the  Chaldaeans  had 
withdrawn  shows  that  the  government  and  people 
must  have  been  absolutely  confident  that  all  danger 
was  over.  Had  they  still  considered  the  situation 
grave,  or  thought  it  possible  that  they  might  have  to 
utilize  their  serfs  soon  again  for  the  defence  of  the 
city,  their  own  interests  would  have  forbidden  them 
to  forfeit  the  loyalty  of  the  serfs  by  such  a  breach  of 
faith. 

Equally  obvious  is  it  in  Chap.  XXI  that  the  story 
of  the  deputation  from  Zedekiah  to  Jeremiah  given  in 
vv.  1-3  must  be  a  legendary  product;  for  unless  one 
shares  the  opinion  of  Duhm,^  Cornill,^  and  Erbt,^  that 
XXXVIII,  2  is  not  an  original  part  of  the  text,  or  that 
of  Giesebrecht,^  that  XXI,  8-10  is  the  work  of  a  later 
interpolater,  there  is  no  other  conclusion  possible 
than  that  the  prophecy,  incompletely  recorded  in 
XXI,  4ff.,  is  the  one  referred  to  in  XXXVIII,  1-4,  it 
being  the  only  one  which  contains  the  utterance 
quoted  in  XXXVIII,  2,  and  it  containing  this  utter- 
ance verbatim.  But  is  it  conceivable  that  Jeremiah 
would  be  publicly  requested  by  the  King  to  prophesy, 
after  he  had  been  imprisoned  just  in  order  to  prevent 
his  prophesying?  And  were  it  conceivable,  would  such 
a  thing  be  Hkely  in  view  of  the  fact  that,  in  his  secret 

1  Op.  cit.,  ad  loc. 
^Op.  cit.,  ad  loc. 
'  Op.  cit.,  p.  49. 
*  Op.  cit.,  ad  loc 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  69 

interview  with  Zedekiah  a  short  time  previously,  Jere- 
miah had  boldly  insisted  on  his  conviction  that  the 
country  was  doomed. 

Additional  proof  that  verses  1-3  are  a  later  addition 
may  be  seen  in  the  discrepancy  between  verse  3  and 
verse  8.  The  former  represents  Jeremiah  as  addressing 
his  message  to  the  messengers  of  Zedekiah,  telling 
them  what  answer  they  should  convey  from  him  to 
Zedekiah:  ''Thus  shall  ye  speak  to  Zedekiah;"  while 
the  latter,  which  is  closely  connected  with  the  inter- 
vening verses  4-7  both  in  thought  and  form,  shows  no 
trace  of  such  a  situation;  indeed  Jeremiah  proceeds  to 
state  what  message  he  has  been  commissioned  by  God 
to  convey  to  the  people:  "And  to  this  people  thou 
shalt  say."  The  latter  half-verse  at  once  suggests 
that,  like  the  second  part  of  the  sermon,  w.  11-14,  so 
this  first  part  must  originally  have  been  made  up  of 
two  subparts,  the  first  of  which  was  addressed  to 
the  King  and  the  second  to  the  people.  Thus,  while 
suggesting  the  original  structure  of  the  first  part  of 
XXI,  4-14,  verse  8a  also  throws  light  on  the  question 
of  the  original  opening  of  the  prophecy,  and  at  the 
same  time  on  the  question  of  the  original  beginning 
of  the  narrative,  XXXVIII,  1-13. 

(b)  the  original  beginning  of  the  narrative, 

xxxviii,  i-i3,  and  of  the  prophecy,  xxi,  4-i4. 

xxxiv,  1-7 — xxxii,  3-5. 

In  discussing  the  question  of  the  original  beginning 
of  XXI,  4-14  and  XXXVIII,  1-13,  it  will  best  serve 
our  purpose  to  consider  the  latter  piece  first. 

The  verse  which  at  present  opens  Chap.  XXXVIII, 
1-13  cannot  have  been  the  original  beginning  of  the 
narrative.    The  words,  "Shephatiah  ben  Mattan,  and 


70  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Gedaliah  ben  Pashhur,  and  Jucal  ben  Shelemiah,  and 
Pashhur  ben  Malchiah  heard  the  words  that  Jeremiah 
had  spoken  to  the  people,"  presuppose  that  a  resume 
has  just  been  given  of  the  prophecy;  what  follows  is 
merely  a  repetition  of  those  parts  which  had  given 
most  offence — much,  e.  g.,  as  in  Chap.  XXVI  there  is 
first  a  rehearsal  of  the  Temple-sermon,  then  the  state- 
ment that  the  priests  and  the  prophets  and  all  the 
people  heard  Jeremiah  dehver  it,  and  finally  an  inci- 
dental reiteration  of  the  most  objectionable  part  of 
the  prophecy. 

This  resum6,  as  we  have  called  it,  this  originally 
preceding  part  is,  however,  not  completely  lost;  it  has 
been  preserved,  in  part  at  least,  in  XXXIV,  1-3. 
Proof  of  this  is  XXXVIII,  3,  "Thus  saith  the  Lord, 
this  city  shall  surely  be  given  into  the  hands  of  the 
army  of  the  King  of  Babylon,  and  he  shall  take  it." 
This  is  not,  as  at  first  glance  it  would  seem,  a  variant 
of  XXI,  lob,  but,  with  the  exception  of  ''into  the 
hands  of  the  army  of  the  King"  for  "into  the  hands  of 
the  King,"  is  a  verbatim  quotation  of  XXXIV,  2b,  as 
read  by  the  LXX:  Oi/rty?  elirev  Kupio?  TrapaSocret 
TrapaSodrjo-eTai  rj  7r6Xi<;  avrr]  ei?  ')(elpa<i  /3acnX€a)<} 
Ba^uXcoyo?  Kal  avWr^jMy^erat,  avrrjv. — Kol  Kavaet 
avTTjv  iv  TTvpL,  though  in  the  present  LXX,  was  not 
in  the  original  LXX,  as  follows  from  the  fact  that 
it  is  lacking  in  the  original  text  of  the  Cod.  Mar- 
chahanus  and  in  the  Syro-Hexaplar  is  Hkewise  found 
only  in  the  margin.  This  identity  of  XXXVIII,  3 
with  XXXIV,  2b  leaves,  first  of  all,  no  doubt 
that  XXXIV,  2-3  must  have  formed  part  of  the 
prophecy  delivered  by  Jeremiah  while  prisoner  in 
the  court  of  guard;  and,  secondly,  it  suggests  that 
XXXIV,  1-3  must  at  one  time  have  been  combined 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  71 

with  XXXVIII,    1-13,  in  fact,  that  it   must    have 
formed  the  first  part  of  its  original  opening. 

Nothing  contrary  to  this  conclusion  can  be  deduced 
from  XXXII,  3-5,  where  the  verses  XXXIV,  2-3 
reoccur,  with  certain  remarks  added,  and  also  with  the 
ilitlerence  that  Zedekiah  is  not  addressed  but  spoken 
of  in  the  third  person.  Jeremiah's  purchase  of  prop- 
erty from  his  cousin  Hanamel  did  not  take  place,  as 
Duhm  ^  and  Cornill  -  argue  it  did,  before  the  reopening 
of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Chalda^ans,  or  even 
before  his  seizure  and  imprisonment  in  the  dungeon, 
but,  as  v.  2  directly  states,  and  the  words,  "in  the 
presence  of  the  Judaeans  that  were  in  the  court  of 
guard,"  of  v.  12,  indirectly  show,  while  he  was  a  pris- 
oner in  the  court  of  guard.  Jeremiah  was  not  trans- 
ferred to  the  court  of  guard,  however,  until  after  his 
secret  interview  with  Zedekiah,  which,  in  turn,  did 
not  take  place  until  after  the  return  of  the  Chal- 
dasans.^  And  since  the  circumstances  that  led  to 
Jeremiah's  imprisonment  in  the  court  of  guard  in  the 
first  place,  are  explicitly  recorded  in  XXXVII,  11-21, 
it  is  clear  that  either  of  two  deductions  must  be  made 
from  XXXII,  3a,  "Zedekiah,  the  king  of  Judah, 
kept  him  imprisoned,  saying,  why  didst  thou  prophesy 
as  follows."  Either  this  remark,  together  with  the 
following  indirect  quotation  of  Jeremiah's  utterance, 
XXXIV,  2f.,  was  inserted  later  by  some  one  who  had 
no  longer  a  clear  knowledge  of  the  real  state  of  affairs; 
or  vv.  3-5  formed  from  the  start  a  part  of  the  ac- 
count, XXXII,  1-15,  and  Jeremiah  meant  to  convey 
the  information,  that  it  was  because  of  the  additional 

*  Op.  cit.y  ad  loc. 

*  Op.  cit.,  ad  loc. 

'  Cf.  Rothstein,  in  Kautzsch  *,  prefatory  remarks  to  Chap.  XXXII. 


72  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

offence  he  gave  by  his  prophecy,  XXXIV,  2f.  etc., 
that  he  was  kept  imprisoned  by  Zedekiah  in  the  court 
of  guard  up  even  until  the  fall  of  Jerusalem. 

But  not  only  does  XXXII,  3-5  not  contradict  our 
conclusions  that  XXXIV,  1-3  originally  preceded 
XXXVIII,  1-13,  it  furnishes  additional  support  of 
the  same.  Apart  from  "And  there  shall  he  be  until  I 
remember  him,  saith  the  Lord,"  5a/3,^  these  verses 
contain  in  excess  of  XXXIV,  2-3  the  declaration, 
5b,  "If  ye  fight  the  ChaldEeans,  ye  shall  not  suc- 
ceed," ki  thillaJfmu  'aeth  hakkasdlm  Id  thaslihu. 
Though  missing  in  the  LXX,  this  declaration,  by  rea- 
son of  its  emphatic  character,  betrays  itself  as  Jere- 
miah's property;  and,  although  it  cannot  be  proved  to 
be  a  part  of  the  resume,  there  seems  to  me  no  doubt 
that  in  the  prophecy  itself,  i.  e.,  in  XXI  .  .  .,  4-14,  it 
had  a  place  just  as  XXXIV,  2-3  had,  in  fact  that  it 
directly  followed  the  latter.  The  proof  of  this  is  as 
follows:  XXXIV,  2-3  (possibly  augmented  by  w^sam 
tamuth,  "and  there  shalt  thou  die,"  in  accordance 
with  XXXII,  5a  yQ,LXXA,  6)  +  XXXII,  5b  must  have 
stood  in  XXI  directly  before  v.  4,  and  so  must  have 
formed  the  original  opening  of  the  prophecy.  In  this 
way  the  original  structure  of  its  first  part,  as  indicated 
by  V.  8  (see  supra),  becomes  restored,  while  "If  ye 
fight  the  Chaldaeans,  ye  shall  not  succeed,"  XXXII, 
5b,  forms  the  connecting  link  between  XXXIV,  2-3 
and  XXI,  4-5.    As  pointed  out  above,^  the  thought 

^  Of  5a)8,  b  I  consider  onty  'ad  poqdl  'ohlo  n^'ttm  jahwa,  "until  I 
remember  him  saith  the  Lord,"  an  interpolation;  the  residing  jamiUh, 
"shall  he  die" — no  doubt  the  original  reading — of  Theodotion  and  the 
cod.  Alexandrinus  for  jihja,  "shall  he  be,"  of  the  Masoretic  text 
shows  clearly  that  these  words  must  have  been  added  later. 

2  See  the  synopsis  of  this  prophecy,  supra,  pp.  6of. 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  73 

expressed  by  XXXII,  5b,  XXI,  4-5  ^  is,  that  the 
fight  in  which  they  arc  engaged  must  fail,  since 
YiiWH  Himself  is  in  arms  against  them. 

Verses  6-7  do  not  seem  to  be  an  original  part  of  the 
prophecy;  they  make  the  impression  of  being  a  com- 
ment on  "shall  die  by  the  sword,  by  famine,  and  by 
pestilence"  of  v.  9.  Evidently  a  later  author  who  did 
not  reaHze  that  famine  and  pestilence  are  the  neces- 
sary resultant  of  warfare,  a  natural  part  of  it,  so  to 
speak,  thought  some  additional  manifestation  of  God's 
wrath  was  meant  in  the  form  of  a  pestilence,  and 
thinking  the  text  incomplete  in  this  regard,  undertook 
by  the  addition  of  vv.  6-7  to  supply  what  he  thought 
was  lacking. 

Now  the  fact  that  XXXII,  5b  is  evidently  a  part  of 
the  prophecy,  though  it  does  not  seem  to  have  had  a 
place  in  XXXIV,  1-3,  leads  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
latter  must  originally  have  belonged,  not  to  the  proph- 
ecy, but  to  the  resume  of  the  prophecy  with  which,  we 
concluded  above,  XXXVIII,  1-13  once  opened. 

In    regard    to   this   resume,   it   seems   clear    from 

^  The  Masoretic  text  of  v.  4  is  stylistically  objectionable,  to  some 
extent  even  obscure.  A  comparison  of  it  with  the  LXX  leads  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  phrases  which  it  has  in  excess  of  the  latter  con- 
stitute later  additions.  These  phrases  are:  '"sacr  b'jaedkliacm,  'acth 
maelaekh  babhacl  'd^,  and  vf^asaphti.  With  these  spurious  phrases 
eliminated,  the  verse  reads:  "Verily,  I  will  turn  to  the  interior  of  the 
city  the  weapons  with  which  ye  are  fighting  the  Chaidaeans  who  are 
besieging  you  outside  the  wall."  mihxi^  lahomd,  I  conclude,  is  to  be 
construed,  not  with  meSebh,  but  with  hassarim.  It  is  clear  the  antithe- 
sis is  not,  as  usually  believed,  between  the  open  country  and  the  cap- 
ital, Jerusalem  (in  that  case  the  author  would  have  said  not  mihiis  la- 
homd, but  mihu^  lirmalaim  or  lair),  but  between  the  outer  and  inner 
fortifications.  The  meaning  of  the  verse  is  that  the  outer  fortifica- 
tions will  soon  be  taken,  and  they  will  then  have  to  concentrate  their 
defence  on  the  inner  fortifications, :.  e.,  on  the  'ophad  or  acropolis. 


74  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

XXXVIII,  2  that  XXI,  9,  preceded  by  the  introduc- 
tory phrase,  "Thus  saith  the  Lord,"  8a  /3,  must  have 
formed  another  part  of  it.  For  this  latter  part  an 
interpolater,  in  all  probabiHty  the  later  redactor, 
substituted  XXXIV,  4-5a  (exclusive  of  the  concluding 
phrase,  ki  dabhar  '"nl  dihharti  n^'um  jahwcB,  5b) ,  for 
which  verses  XXII,  18  served  him  as  a  model.  And  as 
ki  dabbhar  '"ni  dibbartl  n"  him  jahwcB  cannot  refer  to 
any  antecedent  statement  (in  that  case  it  would  have 
to  read  ki  ^'^ni  dibbarti  n^  him  jahwcs  ^) ,  but  to  a 
following  statement  only,  it  is  clear  that  it  also  cannot 
have  originally  belonged  here. 

Also  V.  6  betrays  itself  as  a  later  addition,  both  by 
"in  Jerusalem"  and  by  "Jeremiah  spoke  to  Zedekiah, 
the  king  of  Judah,  all  these  words."  The  first  is  not 
only  quite  superfluous  here,  but  is  unlike  the  definite 
specification  employed  by  the  prophet  when  he 
occasionally  designates  the  place  where  a  prophecy 
was  delivered.  The  second  shows  that  the  interpolater 
erroneously  assumed  that  the  words  addressed  to 
Zedekiah  must  have  been  spoken  in  his  presence.^ 
Verse  7  is  a  variant  of  ib  {cf.  infra). 

There  is  nothing  surprising  in  the  fact  that  the 
author  of  XXXVIII,  1-13,  whether  Jeremiah  or 
Baruch,  in  proceeding  to  relate  what  consequences 
this  prophecy  had  for  the  prophet,  repeated  XXI,  9 
with  its  introductory  phrase  and  XXXIV,  2b.  For 
the  words  addressed  to  the  people,  bidding  them 

1  Cf.  the  frequent  occurrence  of  this  phrase  in  Ezekiel: — XXIII,  34, 
XXVI,  5,  14,  XXVIII,  10,  also  V,  15,  17,  XXI,  22,  37,  XXX,  12,  and 
XXXIV,  24. 

-  As  this  erroneous  view  is  met  with  even  among  modem  exegetes,  it 
may  be  well  to  remark  that  it  is  not  at  all  unusual  for  speakers  even 
of  the  present  day  to  apostrophize  the  absent  head  of  a  state  or  com- 
munity. 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  75 

cease  their  hopeless  fighting  and  join  the  ranks  of 
the  ChaldcTans,  together  with  the  emphatic  words 
addressed  to  the  King,  declaring  that  the  city  is 
bound  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  the  Chaldaians, 
were  what  formed,  in  the  eyes  of  the  Sarim,  the 
really  incriminating,  the  treasonable  feature  of  the 
prophecy.  They  were  the  utterances  to  which  the 
greatest  exception  had  been  taken,  and  this,  by  his 
repetition  of  them,  the  author  meant  to  make  clear. 

Modern  scholars  have  wrongly  taken  exception  to 
the  utterance,  XXI,  8,  9  and  XXXVIII,  2,  and  have 
even  denied  Jeremiah's  authorship  of  it,  on  the 
ground  that  such  an  utterance  would  actually  have 
been  treason.  They  argue  that  such  an  utterance 
from  Jeremiah  was  the  less  Ukely,  as,  a  short  time 
before,  he  had  protested  with  all  his  manhood  against 
the  insinuation  that  he  intended  to  desert  to  the 
Chaldaeans.  Their  reasoning,  however,  is  based  on 
the  erroneous  assumption  that  the  words  really  imply 
a  desire  or  advice  to  surrender  to  the  Chaldaeans. 
The  bitter  irony  of  the  words  escapes  them.  What  the 
prophet  really  means  to  say  is, — so  vain  is  it  for  them  to 
attempt  a  defence,  so  sure  is  the  downfall  of  the  city, 
so  complete  will  be  their  destruction  that  only  those 
who  desert  to  the  Chaldaeans  will  escape:  every 
soul  in  the  city  will  perish.  This  drastic  way  of  put- 
ting it  filled  his  hearers  with  consternation.  Espe- 
cially they  feared  the  effect  of  his  words  on  the  army. 
As  the  Sarim  pointed  out  to  the  King,  when  demand- 
ing his  death,  "In  speaking  such  words,  he  is  bound 
to  take  the  heart  ^  out  of  the  warriors  left  in  the  city 
and  out  of  all  the  people"  (XXXVIII,  4). 

The  original  heading  of  the  prophecy,  XXXIV,  2-3, 
'  m'rappe  is  potential  participle;  see  infra,  pp.  io8f. 


76  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

XXXII,  5b  +  XXI,  4-14,  must  have  corresponded  to 
XXXIV,  I,  that  is,  to  the  heading  of  the  resume;  in 
fact,  it  is  possible  that  it  was  formed  by  what  we 
called  above  the  variant  of  XXXIV,  ib  {i.  e.,  XXXIV, 
7),  preceded  by  XXI,  la,  "the  word  which  came  unto 
Jeremiah  from  God."  On  the  question,  whether  the 
second  part  of  the  heading,  that  is,  XXXIV,  7,  and 
the  original  opening  of  the  prophecy  gave  way  to  the 
story  of  the  deputation  from  Zedekiah  to  Jeremiah, 
or  whether  they  dropped  out  before  the  story  was 
added,  it  is  hardly  possible  to  arrive  at  a  positive  con- 
clusion; however,  this  point  is  of  minor  importance. 

Cornill  ^  and  Giesebrecht,^  in  advancing  the  argu- 
ment that  XXI,  11-14  cannot  be  considered  the  con- 
tinuation of  w.  4-10,  overlook  the  fact,  pointed  out 
above,  that  Jeremiah  in  w.  11 -12  does  not  mean  to 
give  practical  ad\dce,  but  to  set  forth  the  one  course 
by  which  the  nation  might  have  been  saved;  'amar  of 
V.  1 1  has  in  reality  the  force  of  a  pluperfect.  A  parallel 
case  to  this  is  offered  by  Is.  XXX,  1-17.  After  pre- 
dicting the  total  destruction  of  the  nation  (w.  isf.), 
Isaiah  goes  on  to  tell  the  people  (v.  15)  how  their 
doom  might  have  been  averted,  introducing  this  con- 
tinuation with  ko  'amar  jahwcB,  "thus  had  the  Lord 
spoken."  Isaiah's  reference  here  is  clearly  to  the 
prophecy  which  he  dehvered  at  the  time  of  the  Syro- 
Ephraimitic  campaign  {cf.  Is.  VII,  4ff.). 

(c)     XXXIV,     8-22     AND     ITS     ORIGINAL     CONCLUSION,     XXXVII, 
7b- 10 — THE  ORIGINAL  PLACE  OF  XXXVII,  4,  AND   5 

In  regard  to  XXXIV,  8-22,  which  was  delivered 
after  the  serfs  were  reenslaved,  I  am  of  the  opinion,  as 

^  Op.  cit.,  prefatory  remarks  to  Chap.  XXI. 
^  Op.  cit.,  prefatory  remarks  to  Chap.  XXI. 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMIAH  77 

indicated  above,  that  originally  it  was  followed  by 
XXXVII,  7b-io.  There  is  a  marked  resemblance 
both  in  thought  and  phraseology  between  the  latter 
and  the  concluding  verses  of  the  former;  in  fact, 
XXXVII,  8  and  XXXIV,  22  read  hke  variants. 
And  if  the  second  is  eliminated,  XXXIV,  8-21  and 
XXX\TI,  yb-io  ^  fit  together  with  perfect  sequence 
of  thought. 

That  we  find  the  variants  XXXIV,  22  and  XXXVII, 
8  is  not  at  all  surprising,  as  no  doubt  the  one  is  the 
form  this  particular  declaration  had  in  the  prophecy, 
and  the  other  the  form  it  had  in  the  excerpt  of  the 
same  in  the  biographic  chapter. 

The  report,  XXXIV,  8-1 1,  introducing  the  proph- 
ecy, vv.  12-22,  XXXVII,  7b-io,  is  fragmentary.  As 
Cornill  pointed  out,  the  original  report  must  have 
related  the  circumstances  leading  to  the  reiinslavement 
of  the  serfs.  XXXVII,  5  is,  in  my  opinion,  another 
fragment  of  this  report. 

XXXVII,  4,  "And  Jeremiah  could  go  about  -  among 
the  people,  as  he  was  no  longer  kept  in  the  prison- 
house,"  cannot  have  stood  here  originally,  since  we 
nowhere  hear  of  Jeremiah's  being  imprisoned  prior  to 
his  sermon  about  the  reenslavement  of  the  serfs.  The 
verse,  with  the  possible  omission  of  "Jeremiah,"  I 
conclude,  must  have  stood  at  the  end  of  XXXVII,  21, 
after  the  words,  "Thus  Jeremiah  stayed  in  the  court 
of  guard." 

XXXVII,  if.,  as  has  been  pointed  out  by  Stade  and 

»  At  the  beginning  of  XXXVII,  9,  the  text,  as  the  LXX  shows, 
originally  read  an  emphatic  ki.  The  prophet  declares:  "Yea,  thus 
saith  the  Lord,  do  not  deceive  yourselves  in  that  ye  speak,  the  Chal- 
dccans  have  gone  for  good,  for  they  are  not  gone." 

2  bo  w^jofe  is  potential  participle ;  see  infra,  pp.  io8f . 


78  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Others,  cannot  be  considered  an  original  part  of  the 
records  relating  to  Jeremiah's  persecution  in  the  last 
years  of  Zedekiah's  reign,  but  must  have  been  added 
by  a  later  redactor.^ 

From  the  foregoing  analysis  of  Chaps.  XXI, 
XXXIV,  XXXVII,  and  XXXVIII,  it  follows  that, 
like  the  legendary  record  of  Zedekiah's  interview  with 
Jeremiah,  the  legends  of  the  deputations  from  Zede- 
kiah  to  Jeremiah  had  their  origin  (even  as  had  the  leg- 
end of  Hezekiah's  deputation  to  Isaiah,  Is.  XXXVII, 
2ff.^)  in  the  erroneous  conception  which  later  ages  en- 
tertained of  the  literary  prophets.  They  looked  upon 
them  as  political  partisans — like  the  older  prophets 
had  been  in  their  times — as  public  leaders  who  had 
influenced  the  political  affairs  of  their  day,  and  it  was 
inevitable  that  their  well-meant,  though,  as  we  have 
seen,  most  incongruous  additions  to  the  text  should 
reflect  this  view-point. 

The  fact  that  these  additions  or  legends,  which  be- 
came incorporated  in  Chaps.  XXI,  XXXVII,  and 
XXXVIII,  have  been  considered  authentic  has  nat- 
urally caused  this  erroneous  view-point  to  prevail 
even  up  to  the  present  day.  Hence  the  historically 
untrue  conception  which  is  generally  entertained  of 
Jeremiah's  activity  as  a  prophet,  and  particularly  of 
his  relations  to  King  and  people  during  that  final 
period  when  the  country  was  struggling  to  maintain 
its  national  existence.^    Hence,  also,  the  equally  un- 

>  See  Stade  in  ZATW.,  XII,  282;  Giesebrecht,  op.  cit.,  ad  loc; 
Rothstein,  in  Kautzsch,  ^  ad  loc. 

2  See  infra,  Part  III,  Chap.  VI,  "Isaiah's  View  of  the  Doom  and 
His  Attitude  toward  the  Political  Affairs  of  the  Day." 

*  I  take  issue  with  the  prevailing  opinion  that  it  was  through  Jere- 
miah's interference  that  the  contemplated  revolt  against  Babylon  in 
the  fourth  year  of  Zedekiah's  reign  did  not  take  place.    There  is 


PERSECUTION  OF  JEREMI.\H  79 

historic  picture  usually  given  of  Zedekiah  as  a  weak 
and  vacillating  monarch,  and  of  the  conditions  which 
prevailed  in  Jerusalem  at  the  time  of  the  national 


nothing  in  Chaps.  XXVII  and  XXVIII  to  justify  such  a  deduction 
{cf.  supra,  p.  61,  n.  i).  The  fact  is  that  we  have  no  knowledge 
whatever  about  the  circumstances  which  ultimately  induced  Zedekiah 
to  refrain  from  the  revolt.  In  this  connection  it  may  not  be  out  of 
place  to  remark  that  the  story  of  Zedekiah's  journey  to  Babylon, 
Jer.  LI,  59-64,  is  a  legend;  see  Giesebrecht's  proof,  op.  cil.,  p.  245. 
I  would  add  that  the  story,  vv.  59H54,  is  to  be  looked  upon  as  the 
eflort  on  the  part  of  the  pseudonymous  author  of  Chaps.  L  and  LI  to 
make  more  plausible  his  claim  that  Jeremiah  was  the  author  of  the 
pseudo-prophecy,  a  procedure  which  has  many  parallels  in  apocalyptic 
literature. 

^  Of  the  various  accounts  of  Zedekiah  and  of  the  conditions  during 
his  reign,  the  one  by  Erbt  is  particularly  uncritical  and  subjective. 
His  e.xposition  is  for  the  greater  part  purely  conjectural.  In  illustra- 
tion of  his  method,  it  may  suffice  to  quote  his  remark  on  p.  56  in  ref- 
erence to  Jer.  XXXVIII,  igf.  "Those  Judaeans  present  in  the  camp 
of  the  Chaldaeans,  of  whom  Zedekiah  speaks  as  of  a  certain  party, 
well  known  to  Jeremiah,  may  he  identified  with  these  persons,"  i.  e.,  with 
the  family  of  Shafan  and  their  political  copartisans — a  statement  for 
which  there  is  not  even  a  semblance  of  basis. 


CHAPTER  IV 
THE  CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH 

I.    THEIR   IMPORTANCE 

It  was  pointed  out  in  Chapter  II  that  the  Temple- 
sermon  was  the  decisive  event  in  Jeremiah's  career. 
This  is  true,  not  so  much  in  view  of  the  persecution 
and  the  change  in  his  outward  fortunes  which  imme- 
diately followed  it,  as  in  view  of  the  far-reaching  ef- 
fect which  this  persecution  had  on  the  prophet's  inner 
Hfe. 

It  was  as  if  the  measure  of  personal  suffering  was 
necessary  to  bring  his  rehgious  endowment  to  its  full 
development.  Even  as  Hosea's  bitter  domestic  ex- 
perience led  him,  in  advance  of  his  age,  to  the  realiza- 
tion that  God  was  love,  so  the  opprobrium  and  abuse 
which  Jeremiah  had  to  endure,  led  him  through  travail 
of  spirit  to  a  closer  and  more  personal  relation  with 
God  than  we  have  evidence  of  in  the  case  of  any  of 
his  predecessor  prophets.  Forsaken  by  his  fellow- 
men,  driven  into  hiding  to  escape  death,  he  found  a 
higher  fellowship,  a  surer  solace,  in  the  consciousness 
he  acquired  of  God's  nearness  to  him.  His  severe 
isolation  served  but  to  nourish  and  intensify  his 
rehance  upon  God  and  to  open  his  mind  to  the  deeper 
spiritual  significance  of  his  mission.  This  saving 
sense  of  God's  presence  grew  on  the  prophet  until  we 
find  him  exclaiming  from  a  full  heart,  as  the  Psalmist 
later,  "God  is  my  strength  and  my  refuge."  Indeed, 
80    ■ 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  8i 

with  this  sense  of  communion  with  God,  Jeremiah's 
whole  being  became  permeated  and  all  his  thinking 
surcharged. 

So  in  those  years  of  utter  loneliness  originated  the 
confessions — those  dialogues  in  which  the  prophet 
pours  out  his  soul  to  God,  his  human  misgivings,  his 
shrinkings  from  what  he  feels  to  be  inevitable,  his 
profound  depression  verging  at  times  on  despair,  and 
on  the  other  hand,  voices  the  reassurance,  the  positive 
reasoning,  the  promises  of  strength  and  sustenance 
with  which  he  feels  liis  soul  fortified  and  inspired  after 
he  has  thus  unburdened  himself. 

These  confessions  are  distinctly  characteristic  of 
Jeremiah.  They  grew,  as  we  have  already  suggested, 
out  of  the  pecuhar  conditions  in  his  case,  acting  upon 
his  intense  and  deeply  spiritual  temperament.  The 
personal  element  we  find  more  or  less  in  all  the  proph- 
ets, but  nowhere  else  do  we  find  such  complete  revela- 
tions, such  a  laying  bare  of  the  hidden  processes  of  the 
soul  as  in  the  confessions  of  Jeremiah.  Needless  to 
say,  therefore,  they  are  of  central  importance  for  the 
study  of  Jerem.iah  as  well  as  for  the  study  of  prophecy 
in  general. 

2.    THE  DATE  OF  THE  CONFESSIONS 

The  confessions  in  the  order  in  which  they  are 
found  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  are: 
^(a)  XI,  18-XII,  3a,_5-6,_(b)  XV,  10,  15-21,  (c) 
XVII,  5-10,  14-18,  and  its  originally  component  parts, 
(d)  XVIII,  18-20  (a  fragment),  (e)  XX,  7-1 1,  13,  (f) 
XX,  14-18. 

Of  these  confessions,  (b)  and  (c)  were  produced 
while  Jeremiah  was  in  hiding;,  the  former,  doubtless, 
in  the  first  year,  immediately  after  his  escape  from 


82  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

execution/  and  the  latter,  several  years  later,  when,  the 
first  collection  of  his  prophecies  having  been  burned  by 
the  King,  he  had  Baruch  write  them  down  a  second 
time.^  Regarding  the  date  of  XX,  14-18  we  must  agree 
with  Duhm  ^  and  Erbt  *  that  there  is  no  clue  to  the 
particular  occasion  which  called  forth  this  outburst 
of  despair. 

As  to  the  date  of  the  remaining  confessions,  the 
opinions  at  present  entertained  by  biblical  scholars 
are  so  widely  divergent  that  no  final  conclusion  has 
been  reached.^  In  regard  to  the  various  views  that 
have  been  advanced,  it  must  be  pointed  out  that  they 
are  all  based  on  the  erroneous  assumption  that  all  al- 

^  See  supra,  pp.  44f.;  cf.  also  infra,  pp.  go  and  97. 

2  See  supra,  pp.  15  and  19;  cf.  also  infra,  pp.  90  and  104. 

'  Op.  cit.,  p.  168. 

<  Op.  cit.,  p.  189. 

^  XVIII,  18-20  and  XX,  7-13  are  commonly  assigned  to  the  time  of 
Jeremiah's  persecution  under  Jehojakim,  which  persecution,  it  has 
been  generally  thought,  however,  did  not  assume  a  serious  character 
until  after  his  prophecies  had  been  read  by  Baruch  in  the  Temple. 
Erbt,  although  he  holds  with  the  other  scholars  that  up  to  605  Jere- 
miah enjoyed  freedom,  places  these  two  confessions  in  the  beginning 
of  Jehojakim's  reign  {op.  cit.,  pp.  184,  186).  XI,  18-XII,  6  is  by 
Giesebrecht  {op.  cit.,  p.  72)  also  placed  in  the  second  part  of  Jeho- 
jakim's reign,  by  Comill,  however  {op.  cit.,  p.  160),  in  the  first  part 
of  this  monarch's  reign,  while  Rothstein  (in  Kautzsch  ^,  pref.  rem.  to 
XI,  18-XII,  6)  is  inclined  to  consider  it  a  product  of  the  period  prior 
to  the  Temple-sermon,  and  Erbt,  who  takes  XI,  18-23  and  XII,  1-6 
as  two  separate  pieces,  thinks  that  they  date  as  far  back  even  as 
the  first  years  of  Jeremiah's  activity  {op.  cit.,  pp.  172,  174).  In  regard 
to  XX,  14-18,  Rothstein  thinks  they  date  from  the  same  time  as 
vv.  7-13;  while  Giesebrecht  {op.  cit.,  pp.  113,  115)  is  of  the  opinion 
that  they  were  added  by  Jeremiah  as  a  conclusion  to  vv.  7fi'.,  when 
he  committed  the  latter  to  writing,  which,  he  thinks,  may  have  been 
at  the  time  he  was  imprisoned  in  the  court  of  guard.  Similarly  Cornill 
{op.  cit.,  pp.  236,  238f.)  considers  these  last  years  of  Jeremiah's 
activity  their  most  likely  date. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  83 

lusions  to  persecution  must  refer  to  occurrences  in  the 
reign  of  Jehojakim.  The  scholars  have  failed  to  take 
into  consideration  that  Jeremiah's  life  of  persecution 
comprises  two  distinct  periods,  the  reign  of  Jehojakim, 
and  the  latter  part  of  Zedekiah's  reign.  It  would  from 
the  outset  seem  hardly  probable  that  all  his  confes- 
sions, save  alone  XX,  14-18,  should  date  from  the 
first  period;  and  a  close  examination  shows  that  both 
XI,  18-XII,  3a,  5-6  and  XX,  7-1 1,  13  are  really  a 
product  of  the  second  period  of  Jeremiah's  persecu- 
tion. 

(a)  the  date  of  XX,  7-1 1,  13 

To  take  up  the  latter  confession,  XX,  7-1 1,  13, 
first: — In  seeking  to  determine  the  date  of  this  con- 
fession, the  scholars  have  laid  undue  emphasis  on 
V.  7b,  "I  have  become  a  constant  target  for  laughter, 
everyone  mocketh  me."  The  statement  which  follows 
this  is  really  much  more  important:  "As  often  as  I 
speak  I  have  to  cry  out,  have  to  complain  of  violence 
and  abuse;"  for  it  shows  that  at  the  period  of  his  Hfe 
to  which  he  refers  the  prophet  was  exposed  not  only 
to  insult,  but  to  bodily  injury. 

This  conclusion  is  confirmed  by  verse  10.  Indeed, 
the  complaint  in  verse  10  that  he  is  surrounded  by 
spies  who  plot  his  ruin  and  seek  to  entrap  him,  clearly 
appUes  to  Jeremiah's  condition  in  the  last  years  of 
Zedekiah's  reign,  when  on  a  mere  pretext  he  was 
arrested,  flogged,  and  thrown  into  a  dungeon. 

Further,  by  assuming  that  the  confession  originated 
in  the  last  years  of  Zedekiah's  reign,  we  immediately 
see  the  real  force  of  the  opening  verses,  and  are  enabled 
in  turn  to  fix  the  date  of  origin  still  more  definitely. 
In  declaring  that  he  has  had  to  do  God's  bidding 


84  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

regardless  of  the  consequences,  he,  doubtless,  had  in 
mind  his  daring  action  in  the  court  of  guard,  when,  in 
the  very  presence  of  the  Sarim — heedless  of  the  peril 
to  which  he  was  exposing  himself — he  had  sarcasti- 
cally called  upon  the  people  to  desist  from  their  futile 
defence  of  the  city  (Chap.  XXI  and  its  component 
parts).^ 

Conclusive  proof  that  it  was  really  this  event,  or 
rather  the  consequences  therefrom,  that  gave  rise  to 
the  confession  is  to  be  seen  in  the  prayer  of  thanks- 
giving with  which  the  confession  closes.  Far  from 
being  contradictory,  as  has  been  thought,  to  the 
prophet's  declaration  in  the  preceding  part  that  he  is 
beset  by  enemies  on  all  hands,  this  exultant  outburst 
is  quite  in  place.  Jeremiah  certainly  had  cause  for 
thanksgiving  after  his  rescue  from  the  miry  cistern.^ 

(b)  the  date  of  XI,  18-X11,  3a,  5-6 

This  confession  cannot  possibly  date,  as  Rothstein 
and  Erbt  hold,  from  the  time  prior  to  the  Temple- 
sermon.  It  was  clearly  written  at  a  time  when 
Jeremiah  was  bitterly  persecuted  by  the  nation  as  a 
whole.  Proof  of  this  is  the  complaint  with  which  the 
confession  closes,  that  he  was  deserted  and  conspired 
against  even  by  his  nearest  relatives,  also  the  threat 
of  his  own  clan,  to  which  he  refers  (XI,  21),  that  they 
would   take   his  Ufe  unless   he   ceased  prophesying. 

We  have  no  reason  to  believe  that  Jeremiah  was 
actually  persecuted  before  the  Temple-sermon.  Had 
he  been,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  some  reference  to 
it  would  have  come  down  to  us  in  the  biographic  parts 
of  the  book,  considering  that  these  contain  fairly  com- 

1  See  supra,  pp.  53!.,  -j^. 

2  See  supra,  pp.  54f. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  85 

'1    , 

plete  accounts  of  the  various  phases  of  liis  persecution 
after  the  Temple-sermon.  A  certain  degree  of  enmity 
and  opposition  to  the  prophet  may  have  existed  be- 
fore, but  the  great  and  general  outbreak  of  hostility 
was  produced  by  that  event. 

However,  wliile  it  is  clear  that  the  confession, 
XI,  18-XII,  3a,  5-6,  cannot  be  a  product  of  the  time 
prior  to  the  Temple-sermon,  it  is  equally  obvious, 
in  my  opinion,  that  it  cannot  be  a  product  of  the 
period  following  that  event,  that  is,  definitely,  of  the 
period  extending  from  the  Temple-sermon  to  the 
death  of  Jehojakim.  XI,  19  states  most  explicitly 
that  the  people  were  plotting  for  Jeremiah's  death, 
and  seeldng  to  compass  his  ruin  by  preferring  slander- 
ous charges  against  him,  and  v.  21,  that  his  own  clan 
threatened  to  kill  him  if  he  did  not  give  up  prophesy- 
ing. Now  neither  of  these  statements  could  apply 
in  any  way  to  Jeremiah's  case  during  the  reign  of 
Jehojakim,  for  from  the  time  he  delivered  the  Temple- 
sermon,  in  the  first  year  of  Jehojaldm's  reign,  until 
the  death  of  that  monarch,  he  was  in  hiding,  and  such 
plots  and  threats  against  his  Hfe  would  have  been 
absurd,  if  not  actually  impossible.  Jeremiah  had  been 
sentenced  to  death,  not  on  any  false  charge,  but  for  a 
very  real  offence  (from  the  point  of  view  of  those 
times  the  Temple-sermon  was  a  sacrilegious  proph- 
ecy), and  the  death-sentence  would  have  been  executed 
immediately,  had  his  hiding  place  at  any  time  become 
known.  Undoubtedly,  the  confession  belongs  to  the 
second  period  of  Jeremiah's  persecution,  when  he 
was  at  large  and  prophes}ing  openly.  In  those  years 
when  they  were  fighting  desperately  for  their  national 
existence,  Jeremiah  must  have  exasperated  and  en- 
raged his  countrymen  by  his  persistent  declaration 


86  THE  PROPHETS  .OF  ISRAEL 

that  the  nation  was  doomed.  In  their  eyes  he  was  a 
traitor,  and  one  can  easily  understand  that,  under 
those  circumstances,  his  own  priestly  clan  felt  it 
their  duty  to  take  his  life  if  he  would  not  cease  proph- 
esying, and  that  even  his  closest  friends  stood  aloof 
and  denounced  him  (see  XX,  lo).  The  fact  that  it 
was  the  foreign  eunuch,  Ebed-Melech,  who  came  to  his 
rescue  when  he  was  thrown  into  the  miry  cistern  by 
the  Sarim,  and  not  a  compatriot,  as  on  the  occasion 
when  he  was  sentenced  to  death  after  the  Temple- 
sermon,  may  be  taken  as  indicative  of  his  country- 
men's feelings  toward  him,  and  in  fact,  as  charac- 
teristic of  the  situation  in  general.  How  bitterly  his 
rescue  was  resented  may  be  seen  from  the  fact  that 
Ebed-Melech's  own  life  was  not  safe  after  his  inter- 
ference   in    Jeremiah's    behalf    (see    XXXIX,    17). 

(C)    THE  DATE  OF  XVIII,    l8-20 

Finally,  the  fragment,  XVIII,  18-20 — the  beginning 
of  the  confession  is  missing  and  probably  also  the 
conclusion — must  date  Ukewise  from  the  second  period 
of  Jeremiah's  persecution,  since  it,  like  XI,  19  and 
XX,  10,  refers  to  the  people's  plotting  to  get  rid  of 
Jeremiah  by  means  of  false  accusations. 

From  the  foregoing  discussion  of  the  dates  of  the 
various  confessions,  it  will  be  clear  that,  as  they  at 
present  appear  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah,  the  confes- 
sions are  not  in  their  chronological  order.  Nor  have 
the  prophecies  which  at  present  precede  them  any 
bearing  on  their  date,  or  for  that  matter,  any  relation 
to  them  whatever.  This  is  true,  too,  of  the  bio- 
graphic piece,  XX,  1-6,  which  relates  Jeremiah's 
flogging  by  Pashhur  because  of  the  sermon  recorded  in 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  87 

Chap.  XIX,  for  that  the  flogging-incident  has  no 
connection  with  the  confession,  XX,  7-1 1,  13,  is 
evident  from  the  date  which  we  estabHshed  for  the 
latter.  Apart  from  tliis,  Erbt  ^  and  Cornill  ^  to  the 
contrary,  the  date  of  the  flogging  cannot  be  even 
appro.ximately  ascertained,  as  we  have  no  way  of 
fixing  the  time  when  Paslihur  held  the  office  of  the 
PaqU  Nagid.  The  statement,  XXIX,  26,  "Yiiwii 
hath  made  thee  priest  in  place  of  Jchojada,  the  priest," 
in  no  wise  permits  the  deduction  that  Jchojada  was 
among  those  exiled  mth  Jehojachin  in  597,  or  that 
Zcphaniah  held  office  from  that  time  on.  Indeed,  we 
do  not  even  know  whether  the  office  of  the  Paqid 
Nagid  was  identical  with  that  of  the  Paqid.  ^  Erbt 
himself  called  attention  to  this  point  {ih.,  p.  15,  n.  i), 
but  failed  to  draw  the  logical  conclusion  from  it. 

3.  THE  COMPLETENESS  OF  THE  CONFESSIONS  AND  OF 
THE  PROPHETIC  WRITINGS  IN  GENERAL  FROM  A  LIT- 
ERARY POINT  OF  VIEW 

The  view  has  frequently  been  expressed  that  the 
prophetic  works,  as  we  possess  them,  are  very  incom- 
plete, both  as  to  the  number  of  sermons  and  as  to  the 
contents  of  the  same;  that  is  to  say,  that  only  a  limited 
number  of  the  sermons  actually  delivered  by  the 
various  prophets  have  come  down  to  us,  and  these 
not  in  full.  Those  who  hold  this  view  believe,  for  the 
most  part,  that  the  prophets  were  occupied  chiefly 
with  the  oral  deliverance  of  their  message,  and  that 
they  were  less  intent  on  the  preservation  of  the  same. 

^Op.  cil.,  pp.  15-18. 
*0/>.  cil.,  p.  230. 

*  Instead  of  the  plural,  Paqidtm,  the  singular,  Paqtd,  is  to  be  read 
in  XXIX,  26,  in  accordance  with  the  ancient  versions. 


88  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Were  it  not  for  the  zeal  of  their  disciples,  as  they  think, 
very  httle  would  have  been  committed  to  writing,  and, 
as  it  was,  much  was  omitted  altogether,  and  the 
rest  put  into  the  form  of  abstracts.  Add  to  this,  that 
in  the  course  of  transmission  other  losses  were  suffered, 
and  it  seems  to  them  clear  that  what  has  come  down  to 
us  is  but  fragments  and  digests  of  original  orations. 
To  those  who  hold  this  \iew,  it  Vvdll  not  seem  Hkely 
that  a  poet  of  Jeremiah's  genius  should  have  pro- 
duced only  two  confessions  in  the  course  of  his  ten 
years  of  hiding  and,  altogether,  only  six  confessions  in 
the  space  of  twenty-two  years. 

This  view  of  the  prophetic  writings  in  general,  as 
well  as  of  Jeremiah's  confessions  in  particular,  is,  how- 
ever, wholly  unjustified.  It  seems  to  be  due,  prima- 
rily, to  the  fact  that  we  are  inchned  to  look  upon  such 
matters  in  the  Hght  of  our  own  age  of  literary  over- 
production, rather  than  in  the  light  of  the  conditions 
of  those  times.  We  are  apt  to  forget  that,  for  the 
prophets  who  come  within  the  range  of  this  discussion, 
speaking  or  writing  was  not  an  every-day  affair. 
It  was  not  a  profession  with  them  nor  a  means  of 
livelihood.  They  did  not  speak  or  write  because  they 
were  expected  to  speak  or  wTite,  or  because  it  was  the 
customary  thing  to  do,  but  because  they  were  driven 
to  it  by  an  inner  compulsion,  which,  in  its  turn, 
sprang  out  of  the  exigencies  of  the  times.  With  the 
delivery  of  their  message  their  responsibility  ended  for 
the  time  being.  When  they  had  unburdened  them- 
selves of  the  truth  which,  in  travail  of  spirit,  they  had 
felt  taking  shape  within  them,  with  which  they  had 
reasoned  and  wrestled  until  overmastered  by  it  to 
the  point  of  expression — when  they  had  thus  fulfilled 
what  they  felt  to  be  their  mission,  they  returned  simply 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  89 

. )  their  usual  avocations,  until  roused  to  fresh  stirrin<^s 
;  the  spirit  by  some  now  and  pressing  issue,  whether 
m  their  Uves  as  individuals  or  in  the  alTairs  of  the 
nation  at  large. 

Thus  Isaiah's  prophecies,  with  the  exception  of  a 
few  to  the  exact  date  of  which  there  is  no  clue,  group 
themselves  round,  in  fact  were  directly  called  forth 
by,  the  critical  events  of  the  stormy  forty  years  of 
his  prophetic  activity:  viz.,  (i)  the  civil  war  which 
raged  in  the  northern  kingdom, — this  event,  in  all 
likelihood,  marks  Isaiah's  appearance  as  a  prophet, 

(2)  the    Syro-Ephraimitic    alhance    and    campaign, 

(3)  the  investiture  and  conquest  of  Samaria,  (4)  the 
insurrection  of  the  Palestinian  countries  against 
Assyria  (713-11)  ending  with  the  conquest  of  Asdod  by 
Assyria,  (5)  Judah's  aUiance  with  Egj-pt  on  the  death 
of  Sargon  and  Sennacherib's  subsequent  appearance 
in  the  country  (705-701).  In  the  tranquil  intervals, 
Isaiah  remained  silent  and  in  the  background. 

As  far,  however,  as  the  confessions  of  Jeremiah  are 
concerned,  properly  only  four  out  of  the  six  come  in 
consideration  here,  viz.,  XV,  10,  15-21;  XVII,  5-10, 
14-18  and  its  component  parts;  XI,  18-XII,  3a,  5-6, 
and  XX,  7-1 1,  13,  (XX,  14-18  is  solely  an  outburst  of 
despair,  the  expression  of  a  passing  mood,^  and  XVIII, 
18-20  is  a  mere  fragment).  Now  each  of  these  four 
confessions  marks  a  crisis  in  the  spiritual  Kfe  of  its 
author.  As  we  have  seen,  there  are  four  stages  to  be 
distinguished  in  Jeremiah's  persecution:  (i)  the  years 
he  spent  in  hiding  immediately  after  he  was  con- 
demned to  death;  (2)  the  years  he  spent  in  hiding  after 
the  first  collection  of  his  prophecies  was  burned  by 
Jehojakim,  and  during  which  he  caused  the  second 

1  See  infra,  pp.  I27ff. 


QO  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

collection  of  his  prophecies  to  be  prepared;  (3)  the 
time  he  was  confined  in  the  dungeon;  (4)  the  period 
of  time  after  his  rescue  from  the  cistern;  and  for  each 
of  these  stages  there  is  a  corresponding  confession 
in  which  the  prophet's  experiences,  but  preeminently 
his  spiritual  experiences,  are  reflected.  XV,  10,  15-21 
is  the  product  of  the  first  stage;  XVII,  5-10,  14-18 
and  its  component  parts  were  added  to  the  second 
collection  of  Jeremiah's  prophecies,  as,  in  a  manner,  a 
confession  of  faith;  XX,  7-1 1,  13  we  found  to  be  the 
product  of  the  last  stage  of  Jeremiah's  persecution; 
and  XI,  18-XII,  3a,  5-6,  which  also  dates  from  the 
time  of  his  persecution  under  Zedekiah,  may  safely 
be  assumed  to  be  the  product  of  the  third  stage. 
Imprisoned  in  the  dungeon,  without  knowing  whether 
he  should  ever  again  see  the  light  of  day,  what  more 
natural  than  that  reviewing  his  life  of  suffering  and 
devotion,  he  would  be  led  to  ponder  over  the  problem 
of  suffering! 

Few  in  number,  however,  as  are  the  confessions,  and 
brief  as  are  most  of  them,  there  is  nevertheless  a 
completeness  about  them,  a  sufficiency,  that  stamps 
them  as  true  products  of  art.  As  by  a  flashhght,  they 
lay  bare  to  us  the  complex  workings  of  the  prophet's 
soul,  for,  unlike  the  biographic  portions  of  the  book, 
the  confessions  do  not  deal  with  Jeremiah's  persecu- 
tion per  se,  but  only  as  it  reacts  upon  him.  In  this 
way  we  get  a  definite  and  vivid  idea  of  the  prophet's 
suffering  and  of  the  effects  of  this  suffering  on  his 
inner  life,  especially  of  the  way  it  opened  up  his 
mind  to  the  full  realization  of  his  mission. 

This  quality  of  completeness,  or  sufficiency,  as  I 
have  called  it,  is  characteristic  of  the  prophetic  writ- 
ings in  general,  when  these  are  viewed  in  the  right 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  91 

light.  The  prophetic  utterances  are  not,  as  too  often 
supposed,  formal  sermons,  moral  or  philosophic  dis- 
courses per  se.  It  cannot  be  too  frequently  empha- 
sized that  the  prophets  were  not  preachers  or  pub- 
lic speakers  in  the  modern  sense  of  the  term.  They 
were  rather  poets,  creative  artists  in  the  sphere  of 
religion,  and  their  utterances  were  all  immediate, 
spontaneous  products  of  the  intuitive  mind. 

From  this  \dew-point  it  is  impossible  to  find  any- 
thing abridged  or  fragmentary  in  the  prophetic  writ- 
ings, except  in  certain  cases  where  there  has  clearly 
been  something  lost  or  misplaced  in  the  course  of 
transmission.  And  in  the  same  way  it  is  impossible 
to  find  any  justification  for  the  other  theory  which  has 
been  gaining  ground  among  scholars  of  late,  that  the 
prophetic  writings  were  originally  epigrammatically 
short  and  disconnected  utterances. 

4.    THE   PECULIARITY    OF   BIBLICAL  STYLE 

Both  theories,  i.  e.,  the  theory  that  the  prophetic 
WTitings  consist  of  epigrammatically  short,  discon- 
nected utterances,  and  the  view  that  they  arc  largely 
fragmentary,  must  be  ascribed  to  a  general  misunder- 
standing of  the  essential  character  of  Biblical  style, 
or  for  that  matter  of  Oriental  style  in  general.  Orien- 
tal composition  presents  certain  peculiarities,  or, 
more  correctly,  one  radical  peculiarity,  which  in  its 
various  manifestations  both  startles  and  mystifies  the 
modern  Occidental  mind. 

Now,  instead  of  accepting  the  seeming  peculiarities 
as  facts  wth  a  raison  d'etre  of  their  own  and  building 
up  a  theory  in  accordance  with  these  facts,  the  tend- 
ency has  been  to  reason  them  away  as  if  they  were 
mere  errata,  or  to  disregard  them  altogether. 


92  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

I  had  occasion  above  (see  p.  37)  to  refer  to  this 
fundamental  trait  of  Oriental  style,  and  to  point 
out  that  it  manifests  itself  in  the  abrupt  thought- 
transitions,  in  the  seemingly  unrelated  scenes  and 
stages  in  the  narration — the  juxtaposition  of  ideas, 
where  not  coincidence  is  to  be  understood  but  se- 
quence. In  further  elucidation  of  this  point  I  shall 
quote  from  my  article  there  referred  to: 

"Occidental  Hterature  tolerates  no  sudden  transi- 
tions; each  Hnk  in  the  chain  of  thought  must  be 
given,  and  given  in  its  proper  sequence,  and  each 
situation  be  developed  out  of  the  preceding  one. 
But  in  Oriental  Hterature,  quite  frequently,  the 
thoughts  are  joined  to  one  another  in  an  aphoristic 
manner,  the  author  relying  on  the  reader  to  discern 
the  association  of  ideas  which  leads  from  one  thought 
to  the  other.  Similarly,  in  the  progress  of  narration, 
situation  is  added  to  situation  in  much  the  same  way 
as  a  series  of  events  is  depicted  by  a  noveUstic  painter. 
Like  the  latter,  the  Oriental  writer  depends  on  his 
readers  or  audience  to  see  the  proper  relation  or 
sequence  of  the  various  situations." 

This  Oriental  habit  of  thought  and  depiction,  so 
radically  different  from  ours,  must  be  constantly 
borne  in  mind,  not  only  in  interpreting  the  confessions 
of  Jeremiah,  or  even  the  prophetic  wTitings  in  general, 
but  in  interpreting  any  characteristic  piece  of  Oriental 
literature,  whether  it  be  Firdausi's  Shah-name,  or 
Sadi's  Gulistan,  or  the  Hamasa  of  Old-Arabic  poetry. 
A  very  pertinent  illustration  of  this  fact  is  to  be  found 
in  Friedrich  Ruckert's  article,  "Bemerkungen  zu 
Mohl's  Ausgabe  des  Firdusi,  Band  I"  (in  ZDMG, 
VIII,  239-329,  and  X,  127-282),  where,  it  will  be  no- 
ticed, in  a  great  many  cases  the  mistakes  which  Ruck- 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  93 

ert  points  out  in  Mohl's  translation,  may  be  traced  to 
this  stumbling-block  of  the  abrupt  transitions.  Mohl 
was  no  doubt  guided  by  his  own  modern  stylistic 
feeling  and  so  failed  to  discern  the  intentions  of  his 
original.  Rilckert  nowhere  seeks  to  explain  the  cause 
of  Mohl's  mistake  in  tliis  respect,  but  his  own  more 
poetic  insight  led  him  invariably  to  catch  the  thought- 
connection  in  spite  of  the  abrupt  transitions  by  which 
the  mere  philologian  was  misled.  It  was,  in  fact, 
o\\'ing  to  this  unerring  poetic  insight  of  his,  that 
Ruckert  penetrated  more  deeply  into  the  spirit  of  the 
Oriental  writings  than  perhaps  any  other  scholar  in 
his  time. 

The  failure  on  the  part  of  modern  scholars  to  realize 
this  tendency  of  the  Biblical  writers  to  disregard  rigid 
sequence  and  formal  transitions,  has  caused  confusion 
in  the  interpretation  of  the  other  Biblical  books  no 
less  than  in  the  interpretation  of  the  prophetic  writ- 
ings. In  a  great  many  cases  where  Old  Testament 
exegetes  suspect  that  the  text  is  in  disorder  or  other- 
wise defective,  there  is  in  reahty  nothing  amiss. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  in  this  connection  that  the 
one  example  of  this  style  which  occurs  in  classical 
literature,  the  Elegies  of  Tibullus,  has  been  similarly 
misunderstood.  The  Elegies  of  Tibullus  were,  in 
fact,  looked  upon  as  fragments,  until  J.  Vahlen,  dis- 
cerning their  inner  coherence,  pointed  out  that  what 
seemed  to  be  fragmentariness  was  but  a  peculiarity  of 
style.i 

In  my  above  quoted  article  I  attributed  tliis 
peculiarity  of  style  to  the  seeming  tendency  of  the 
Oriental  mind  to  think  by  leaps  and  bounds.     My 

'See  "Uber  drei  Elegien  des  TibuU"  in  " Monatsberichte  der 
Berliner  Akademie,"  1878,  pp.  343(1. 


94  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

attention,  however,  has  since  been  drawn  to  the  fact 
that  a  similar  peculiarity  exists  in  one  species  of 
Occidental  literature,  viz.,  the  folksong — the  folksong 
of  whatever  age  or  clime.  Here  too  we  find  abrupt 
transitions  without  any  apparent  Hnks,  sudden  gaps 
in  the  narration  which  are  left  to  the  imagination 
of  the  reader  to  supply.  As  Wilhelm  Grimm  has 
expressed  it  with  reference  to  the  Old-Danish  folk- 
songs: ^'Alles  in  der  Mitte  Liegende,  Verbindende  ist 
ausgelassen,  die  Thaten  stehen  strong  nehen  einander, 
ivie  Berge,  der  en  Gipfel  bloss  heleuchtet  sind."  ^ 

^  See  "Kleinere  Schriften,"  I,  182;  cf.  also  IV,  539:  "Die  Erzah- 
lung  in  diesen  Liedern  ist  abgebrochen,  deutet  manchmal  selbst  das 
Wichtige  nur  an:  sie  beriihrt  gleichsam  wie  ein  einzelner  Sonnen- 
strahl  nur  die  vorragenden  Spitzen  eines  Gebirges  und  lasst  das 
Andere  in  Dunkelheit  liegen." — I  am  indebted  for  this  information  to 
Professor  Max  Friedlaender  of  Berlin,  with  whom  I  discussed  the 
subject  after  a  lecture  he  delivered  in  Cincinnati  on  folksongs.  Prof. 
Friedlaender  had  considered  the  abrupt  transitions  a  distinct  pecul- 
iarity of  the  folksong,  as  I  had  believed  them  particularly  characteris- 
tic of  Oriental  literature,  and  it  was  a  matter  of  mutual  interest  to 
have  our  views  supplemented  in  this  way. 

In  view  of  the  importance  of  this  point  for  Biblical  scholars,  since 
the  parallel  in  question  illuminates  and  simplifies  the  question  of 
Biblical  comparison,  I  shall  quote  here  also  from  Wilhelm  Scherer's 
excellent  characterization  of  the  Folksong  in  "Geschichte  der  deut- 
schen  Litteratur,"  pp.  256f.: 

"Trotzdem  herrscht  im  Volksliede  keineswegs  immer  Klarheit. 
Die  Lieder  sind  nicht  selten  und  gehoren  zu  den  schonsten,  worin  die 
Meinung  im  Ganzen  vollkommen  verstandlich,  auch  jede  Einzelheit 
f  iir  sich  deutlich  ist,  die  Verkniipfung  der  Einzelheiten  unter  einander 
und  ihre  Beziehung  auf  das  Ganze  jedoch  im  Dunkel  bleibt.  So  das 
Lied:  'Ich  hort'  ein  Sichelein  rauschen.'  Die  Sichel  rauscht  durchs 
Korn;  ein  Madchen  klagt  um  den  verlorenen  Liebsten;  eine  andere 
trostet  sie:  'Lass  rauschen,  Lieb,  lass  rauschen!'  und  spricht  von 
eigenem  Gliick,  das  sie  im  Friihling  erworben.  Die  Scene  im  Acker- 
feld,  der  Umstand,  dass  zwei  Madchen  sich  unterreden,  die  Situation, 
dass  der  Dichter  sie  gewissermassen  belauscht,  dies  alles  muss  errathen 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  95 

One  might  conclude  from  this  that  this  manner  of 
presentation  must  at  one  time,  in  the  primitive  stages 
of  Hterary  production,  have  been  common  to  all 
literatures. 

In  our  analysis  of  the  prophetic  writings  we  shall 
find  many  illustrations  of  tliis  peculiarity  of  style. 

5.    ANALYSIS    AND    INTERPRETATION    OF    THE 
CONFESSIONS 

(a)  the  COXFESSIOX.  XV,  10,  15-21  AND  ITS  SEQUEL,  XVI,  I-9 

XV,  15,  according  to  all  indications,  originally 
formed  the  continuation  of  v.  lo.  Verse  ii  is  too 
corrupt  to  admit  of  any  positive  conclusion;  what 
is  intelligible  of  it,  however,  seems  to  have  no  relation 
to  this  confession.  In  regard  to  v.  12  no  definite 
decision  is  possible  either,  since  its  meaning  dep)ends 
on  V.  II,  but,  it  must  be  noted,  the  Aramaic yaro"  is 
most  surprising,  and  the  reading  of  the  verse  in  the 
LXX  dififers  widely  from  that  of  the  Masoretic  text. 
Verses  13-14  are  clearly  out  of  place  here;  they  are 
absolutely  unrelated  to  the  confession.     Unquestion- 

werden,  unci  der  Gegensatz  zwischen  Friihling  und  Herbst  schwcbt 
nur  wie  ein  ungewisser  Schein  iibcr  dcm  Ganzcn.  Die  traurige  Stim- 
mung  aber,  worin  die  Trostung  nichts  hilft  und  fremdes  Gliick  nur 
das  Weh  vergrossert,  macht  sich  von  vom  herein  entschieden  fiihibar. 
"  Das  Errathenlassen  ist  iiberhaupt  eines  der  wirksamsten  Mittcl 
des  Volksliedes.  Sinnliches  wird  ausgesprochen,  das  Geistige  muss 
man  merken.  Die  Liebenden  sprechen  wenigcr  von  ihren  Gcfiihlen, 
als  von  Kranz  oder  Ring.  Es  giebt  auch  Lieder,  die  ganz  dramatisch 
nur  in  Gesprach  verlaufcn  und  damit  zugleich  eine  Reihe  von  Iland- 
lungen,  ja  ein  ganzes  Menschenschicksal  enthiillen.  Dor  Zcilfort- 
schritt  muss  oft  errathcn  wcrden:  'Dort  hoch  auf  jcnem  Bcrge  da 
geht  ein  Miihlenrad,  das  mahlet  nichts  dcnn  Licbe  die  Nacht  bis  an 
den  Tag' — und  gleich  darauf  heisst  es:  'Die  Muhle  ist  zerbrochen,  die 
Liebe  hat  ein  End.' " 


96  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

ably  they  got  in  here  by  mistake  from  XVII,  3-4, 
where  they  again  occur,  but  where  they  form  a 
logical  sequence  with  the  preceding  vv.  1-2.  Verse  15, 
however,  as  Giesebrecht  points  out,^  in  its  opening, 
"Thou,  O  Lord,  knowest  it,"  plainly  refers  back  to 
V.  10,  the  contents  of  the  latter  being  the  object  of 
jadata;  in  this  way  v.  15  makes  the  impression  of 
being  the  immediate  continuation  of  v.  10. 

Verse  10 
"  Woe  unto  me,  my  mother,  that  thou  didst  bear  me, 
a  man  of  strife  and  enmity  for  the  whole  land; 
I  have  not  lent  to  them  nor  have  they  lent  to  me,  yet 
everyone  curseth  me." 

"I  have  not  lent  to  them  nor  have  they  lent  to  me" 
is  Jeremiah's  figurative  way  of  declaring  that  there 
exist  no  personal  grounds  for  the  enmity  of  his  fellow- 
men  to  himself.  The  effect  of  money  relations  upon 
friendship  seems  to  be  part  of  the  worldly  wisdom  of 
all  ages. 

No  detailed  description  of  the  implacable  hatred 
with  which  the  people  regarded  Jeremiah  after  his 
Temple-sermon  could  be  so  effective  as  the  trenchant 
words,  "  Everyone  curseth  me."  In  order  to  realize  the 
full  significance  of  these  words,  we  must  bear  in  mind 
the  sinister  power  which  in  ancient  times  was  believed 
to  inhere  in  a  curse.  The  belief  so  well  expressed  in 
Satapatha  Brahmana,  XV,  9,  4,  11,  "Robbed  of  his 
power,  robbed  of  the  blessing  of  all  his  good  deeds,  he 
must  depart  from  this  world,  who  has  been  cursed  by  a 
Brahman,"  ^  belongs  to  the  stock  of  religious  notions, 

^Op.  cit.,  adloc. 

2 Quoted  by  Oldenberg  in  "Die  Religion  des  Veda,"  p.  519. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  97 

common  to  all  nations  of  antiquity.  In  ancient  Hellas 
and  Rome,  no  less  than  tliroughout  the  Orient,  px^ople 
believed  that  a  curse  pronounced  with  proper  rites, 
and  by  a  duly  quahfied  person,  i.  c,  by  a.  priest  or 
diviner,  was  bound  to  bring  earthly  destruction  on 
the  person  upon  whom  it  was  invoked,  and  to  pursue 
him  even  beyond  the  grave.  There  is  ample  proof 
that  this  belief  prevailed  also  in  ancient  Israel.  It 
may  suffice  to  refer  to  Num.  XXII,  6,  or  to  point  out 
the  noncommittal  phrase,  "  May  God  so  do  unto  me, 
and  even  more!"  (II  Sam.  Ill,  35,  XIX,  14,  d  alii.), 
used  in  place  of  the  complete  formula  of  an  oath.^ 
The  use  of  this  phrase  shows  that  it  was  common 
to  refrain  from  uttering  a  curse  even  for  literary 
purposes,  so  great  was  the  fear  that  the  curse  might 
take  effect  even  though  pronounced  without  sinister 
design.  The  curse  was  resorted  to  particularly  when 
the  enemy  was  out  of  reach,  as  Jeremiah  was  during 
the  time  he  was  in  hiding. 

Verse  15 
"Thou,  0  Lord,  knowest  it,  remember  me  and  pay 
heed  unto  me,  procure  vengeance  for  me  on 
my  persecutors  not  according  to 

Thy   long-suffering — 
take  me  away;  know  that  I  have  borne  shame  for 
Thy  sake." 

When  properly  construed,  this  verse  is  perfect  and 
needs  no  emendation.    Contrary  to  the  accents  and  the 

*  Formerly  an  oath  was  substantially  an  imprecation.  He  that 
swore  invoked  the  vengeance  of  God  or  the  gods,  as  the  case  might 
be,  if  he  were  not  speaking  the  truth,  or  if  he  should  ever  violate  his 
promise.  The  two  e.xamples  of  this  which  we  have  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment are  Job's  asseveration  of  innocence,  Job  XXXI,  and  Ps.  VII,  4-6. 


98  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

customary  translation,  "not  according  to  thy  long- 
suffering"  ('a/  l^'aeraekh  'app^kha)  is  not  to  be  con- 
strued with  the  following  "take  me  away"  {tiqqaheni), 
but  in  accordance  with  the  LXX  and  the  Targ.  with 
the  preceding  "procure  vengeance  for  me  on  my 
persecutors"  {hinnaqaem  li  merd(fphai);  "procure 
vengeance  for  me  not  according  to  Thy  long-suffering" 
means  let  the  vengeance  be  speedy,  tiqqaheni  has 
here  the  same  meaning  as  qah  naphsi,  "let  me  die," 
I  Ki.  XIX,  4.  The  customary  translation,  "take  me 
not  away  in  Thy  long-suffering,"  has  been  generally 
felt  to  be  unsatisfactory;  but,  when  taken  as  sug- 
gested, not  only  does  the  sentence  make  excellent 
sense,  but  the  pathos  of  the  situation  is  enhanced 
beyond  measure  by  Jeremiah's  following  up  his  plea 
for  vengeance  with  the  request  that  God  may  rather 
let  him  die.  To  emend  this  beautiful  and  characteris- 
tic verse,  as  modern  exegetes  have  done,  by  striking 
out  the  most  essential  phrase  and  thus  robbing  it  of 
its  loftiest  thought,  savors  almost  of  vandalism.^ 
The  passage  shows  that,  although  driven  into  hiding 
by  the  people's  fanaticism,  although  hated  and  cursed 
by  the  whole  nation,  Jeremiah  did  not  become  a  prey 
to  his  resentment.  He  was  saved  from  permanent 
bitterness  by  those  springs  of  loyalty  and  tenderness 

1  However  widely  Giesebrecht  {op.  cit.),  Duhm  {op.  cit.),  Cornill 
{op.  cit.),  Erbt  {op.  cit.,  p.  176),  and  Rothstein  (in  Kautzsch^,  and  in 
Kittel,  "Biblia  Hebraica")  differ  in  their  emendations  of  the  verse 
in  other  respects,  they  are  at  one  in  omitting  tiqqaheni.  That  the 
phrase  is  missing  in  the  LXX  seems  to  them  to  warrant  their  proce- 
dure. Evidently,  however,  the  LXX  had  in  this  particular  case  a 
very  defective  text,  for  neither  did  they  read  'attajada'ta  with  which 
the  verse  opens.  Such  a  text  can  in  no  case  have  much,  if  any  critical 
value,  least  of  all,  however,  alongside  of  such  an  excellent  text  as  is 
in  the  present  case  the  Masoretic  text. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  99 

which  lay  at  the  root  of  liis  nature,  and  which  no 
amount  of  persecution  could  dry  up. 

The  temporary  paralyzing  effect  which  his  con- 
demnation produced  on  him  is  described  in  w.  10-15. 
He  was  weary  of  hfe,  and  would  fain  lay  down  the 
burden.  What  had  his  eflforts  availed,  his  zeal,  his 
devotion  to  the  service  of  God? — Only  to  bring 
shame  upon  him,  and  to  make  him  an  outlaw  among 
men. 

Verses  16-21  picture  the  reaction  from  this  state. 
We  see  how  Jeremiah  drew  strength  from  his  trials — 
how  he  became  surer  of  his  mission,  surer  of  God's 
purpose.  In  his  enforced  solitude  he  came  to  realize 
that  within  himself  he  possessed  a  source  of  infinite 
happiness,  in  God's  revelation  to  him.  His  soul 
swells  with  gladness  at  the  knowledge  that  he  is  the 
chosen  servant  of  God.  Hence  the  apparently  sudden 
outburst  in  v.  16,  relieving  the  gloom  of  the  preceding 


"When  Thy  words  have  offered  themselves,  I  have 

[verily]  devoured  them, 
Thy  words  have  been  to  me  the  joy  and  delight  of  my 

heart, 
For  I  am  dedicated  to  Thee,^  0  Lord,  God  Sabaoth." 

But  while  his  personal  happiness  is  complete,  for  he 
knows  that  he  has  given  himself  up  to  God,  and  that 
God  is  working  through  him,  there  is,  nevertheless,  a 
terrible  shadow  hanging  over  his  thoughts,  a  great 

'  nigra  icm  pHoni  'al  means,  as  II  Sam.  XII,  28,  Is.  IV,  i  show, 
"belong  to  a  person,"  "be  a  person's  property,"  and,  accordingly, 
said  of  God,  the  phrase  means  cither  "belong  to  Him"  {cf.  Am.  IX, 
12)  or,  as  here,  "be  dedicated  to  Him." 


loo  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

crushing  weight  from  which  he  cannot  escape,  the 
foreknowledge  of  his  people's  doom. 

In  vv.  lyf,  which  mark  this  second  seemingly  abrupt 
transition,  he  cries : 

"I  have  not  sat  in  the  company  of  the  joyful  and 

rejoiced, 
I   have   sat  lonely   because   of   Thy   overmastering 

force, ^ 
For  Thou  hast  filled  me  with  gloom.^ 
Why  must  my  grief  last  forever? 
Why  must  my  wound  be  incurable,  ever  refusing  to 

heal? 
Thou   hast   been   unto   me   as    a   deceptive   brook,^ 
As  water  that  cannot  be  relied  upon." 

This  pathetic  outburst  shows  better  than  anything 
else  how  completely  those  exegetes  have  failed  to 
penetrate  into  the  spirit  of  the  confession,  who  suppose 
that  the  craving  for  vengeance  was  uppermost  in 
Jeremiah's  mind.  All  that  he  has  suffered  on  his  own 
account,  all  the  rebuffs,  all  the  hatred  and  abuse  are 
lost  sight  of  in  this  larger  sorrow  he  feels  for  his 

1  By  jadkha  the  overmastering  force  which  God's  revelation  exer- 
cises over  him  is  meant  (c/.  XX,  7fF.).  jad  is  elliptical  for  haezqath 
jad  which  occurs  Is.  VIII,  ii  (c/.  also  Ezek.  Ill,  14,  w^jad  jahwae 
'alai  hazaqd).  The  elliptical  phrase  occurs  again,  though  with  a 
different  connotation,  in  Is.  XXVIII,  2,  hinnl'^h  la'araes  b^jad 
"who  shall  thrust  [her]  to  the  ground  with  violence." 

2  Cf.  to  this  meaning  of  zaam  the  phrase  panim  nizamlm,  "sullen 
face,"  Prov.  XXV,  23;  with  a  somewhat  similar  meaning  If  math 
is  used  in  Jer.  VI,  11,  "I  am  filled  with  the  grim  [pictures]  of  God's 
[revelation],  so  that  I  am  unable  to  endure  it." 

3  'akhzabh  is  elliptical  for  nahal  'akhzabh;  the  explanation  of  this 
figure  is  to  be  found  Job  VI,  15-20. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  ici 

doomed  people.  It  is  reasonable  to  conclude  that  this 
sorrow  weighed  hca\ier  on  liim  during  the  lonely  years 
he  was  in  liiding,  and  that  his  gloomy  forebodings 
deepened  until  he  felt  liimself  on  the  very  verge  of 
despair. 

But  his  reliance  on  God  was  too  real,  too  deeply- 
rooted,  and  liis  will-power  too  great  for  liim  to  become 
a  prey  to  despair.  He  braces  himself  ^\^th  the  thought 
of  his  mission,  and  shakes  off  his  weakness  and  depres- 
sion as  apostasy: 

"Therefore,  thus  saith  the  Lord,  if  thou  returnest 

[unto  me], 
I  shall  let  thee  remain  in  my  service, 
If  thou  producest  noble  things,  not  base  ones, 
Thou  shalt  be  my  mouth-piece." 

What  a  wonderful  piece  of  self-analysis  we  have 
here!  Jeremiah  confesses  that  in  yielding  to  despair 
over  the  coming  ruin  of  the  nation  he  has  shown  him- 
self unworthy  of  his  calling,  has  deserted  the  very 
post  assigned  to  him  by  God,  and  acknowledges  that 
he  has  to  fortify  himself  if  he  means  to  remain  in 
God's  service.  More  than  this,  he  concludes  the 
verse : 

"Let  them  become  converted  to  thee,  sink  not  thou  to 
their  level," 

impljang  by  these  words  that  if  he  were  to  give  way 
to  his  despair,  he  could  never  succeed  in  carr>ing  out 
his  task;  he  would  just  sink  to  the  level  of  the  people, 
whereas,  by  remaining  steadfast,  he  cannot  fail  to 
make  converts  in  the  end. 


IC2  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

In  w.  20,  21  there  is  a  note  of  triumph,  of  assurance 
after  doubt,  which  lends  to  these  verses  the  effect  of  a 
carefully  worked- up  climax: 

"And  I  will  make  thee  as  an  inaccessible  wall  of  brass 

against  this  people, 
so  that  they  shall  wage  war  against  thee,  but  not 

conquer  thee, 
for  I  am.  with  thee  to  shield  and  to  dehver  thee,  saith 

the  Lord. 
Even  so  will  I  deliver  thee  out  of  the  hands  of  the 

wicked, 
and  redeem  thee  out  of  the  hands  of  the  mighty." 

Verse  20  is  practically  identical  with  I,  18  of  the 
consecration  \ision.  But  nothing  could  be  more 
significant  than  this  repetition.  After  all  the  years  of 
fruitless  striving,  God  imparts  to  Jeremiah  essentially 
the  same  assurance  and  encouragement  that  he  had 
given  him  when  sending  him  forth  on  his  mission. 
It  was  from  this  unbounded  trust,  rooted,  as  it  was, 
in  his  consciousness  of  constant  union  with  God,  that 
Jeremiah  derived  his  conviction  of  victory,  notwith- 
standing apparent  failure,  and  drew  the  strength  to 
fulfill  his  task  in  spite  of  the  seemingly  insurmountable 
difi&culties  opposing  him.  In  accordance  -with  this 
exultant  trust  he  proceeds  in  XVI,  1-9,  which  may 
appropriately  be  called  the  sequel  of  the  confession, 
to  represent  his  lot  of  bitter  isolation  and  renunciation 
as  expressly  ordained  by  God. 

Psychologically  considered,  the  confession,  XV,  10, 
15-21,  as  a  whole,  must  be  accounted  one  of  the  most 
wonderful  and  most  logical  pieces  of  self-analysis  that 
we  have  in  any  literature. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  103 

(b)  the  confession.  XVII.  5-10,  14-1S  AND  ITS  ORIGINALLY 
COMPONENT  PARTS,  IX,  2  2,  23,  X,  23,  24,  XVI,  19.  THEIR 
ORIGINAL  ORDER 

It  was  Giesebrccht  ^  who  discerned  that  XVI,  19 
must  have  belonged  originally  to  the  confession, 
XVII,  5-10,  14-18.^  It  certainly  does  not  belong 
in  its  present  place,  among  the  spurious  verses  XVI, 
10-18,  21,^  where  it  serves  but  to  break  the  sequence 
of  thought;  there  is  no  doubt  that  v.  21  is  the  im- 
mediate continuation  of  v.  18.''  The  genuineness 
of  XVI,  19  is  beyond  question;  the  ardent  expression 
of  faith  it  contains  is  in  keeping  with  the  sublime  trust 
revealed  throughout  Jeremiah's  prophecies,  and  the 
hope  for  the  conversion  of  mankind  which  it  voices  is 

'  See  op.  cil.  on  XVI,  19  and  prefatory  remarks  to  Chap.  XVII,  1-18. 

'The  intervening  vv.,  11-13,  the  majority  of  modern  exegetes 
agree,  cannot  have  formed  a  part  of  this  confession  originally.  Verse 
1 1  has  no  bearing,  as  at  first  sight  it  might  seem  to  have,  on  XVII,  5-8 
or  IX,  22,  23,  which,  as  I  shall  show  presently,  originally  preceded 
XVII,  5-8,  the  subject-matter  of  these  verses  being  trust  in  God  and 
not  dishonest  acquisition  of  wealth.  Verse  1 2,  on  the  face  of  it,  cannot 
have  been  written  by  Jeremiah;  it  has  for  its  basis  the  eschatological 
notions  of  later  Judaism,  and,  moreover,  claims  absolute  sanctity  for 
the  Temple,  which  belief,  we  know,  Jeremiah  uncompromisingly 
denounced.  Verse  13  betrays  itself  by  its  quotations  from  other 
passages  of  Jeremiah  as  an  interpolation;  it  also  differs  in  diction  from 
this  confession,  and,  it  must  be  granted,  has  no  weight  in  its  present 
connection. 

'  It  is  generally  agreed  that  XVI,  10-18,  21  is  a  product  of  later 
times. 

*  Verse  20  is  a  later,  perhaps  marginal  comment  on  v,  19b,  sug- 
gested, as  Giesebrecht  rightly  points  out,  by  II,  1 1.  This  is  clear  from 
a  comparison  of  the  two  verses;  in  II,  11,  "even  though  they  are  no 
gods,"  is  a  logical  addition,  but  in  XVI,  20  it  has  no  point  whatever, 
being  added  quite  redundantly;  it  is  really  contained  in  the  question, 
"  Can  a  man  manufacture  his  gods  ?  " 


I04  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

met  with  again  in  III,  17  and  IV,  2.^  Giesebrecht, 
with  fine  acumen,  places  XVI,  19  after  XVII,  10, 
remarking  that  v.  14  seems  to  have  direct  reference  to 
such  an  utterance  as  XVI,  19.  His  reasoning  in 
regard  to  this  confession  is  most  suggestive,  and  shows 
a  clear  insight  into  the  workings  of  the  prophet's 
mind.  Giesebrecht  also  expresses  the  opinion  that 
this  confession  was  added  by  Jeremiah  to  the  second 
collection  of  his  prophecies,  in  order  that,  despite  the 
persecution  he  was  suffering,  he  might  bear  testimony 
to  his  innermost  convictions  (see  supra  "  General 
Survey,"  pp.  i5f.  and  i9f.,  also hifra,  pp.  ii4f.). 

I  fully  agree  with  Giesebrecht  in  Ms  \iew  regarding 
the  circumstances  that  prompted  the  confession,  and 
also  in  his  view  that  XVII,  5-10,  XVI,  19,  XVII, 
14-18  belong  together.  I  am  convinced,  however, 
that  these  parts  do  not  form  the  whole  confession. 
It  seems  clear  to  me  that  IX,  22,  23,  X,  23,  24  were 
also  at  one  time  a  part  of  this  confession.  It  is  gen- 
erally agreed  that  these  two  passages  have  no  logical 
connection  in  their  present  context,  and  they  are 
clearly  not  in  their  proper  place.  Some  have  gone  so 
far  as  to  throw  out  one  or  both  of  these  passages  as 
spurious.^    To  my  mind,  however,  not  only  do  IX,  22, 

1  That  Jeremiah's  authorship  of  XVI,  19  cannot  be  questioned  is 
aciinowledged  also  by  Comill,  who  remarks  on  this  point:  "Die  Worte, 
welche  die  bekehrten  Heiden  hier  reden,  sind  durch  und  durch  jere- 
mianisch,  und  die  Erwartung,  dass  auch  die  Heiden  sich  zu  Jahve 
bekehren  werden,  liegt  in  der  Richtung  der  jeremianischen  Theologie 
und  ist  eine  einfache  Consequenz  seines  Rehgionsbegriffes "  (op. 
cit,  ad  loc). 

2  Giesebrecht,  op.  cit.;  Graetz,  "Emendationes  in  Plerosque  Veteris 
Testamenti  Libros,"  I,  p.  46,  Stade,  "Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel," 
I,  676,  Anm.  &  Rothstein  in  Kautzsch  ^  declare  X,  22,  23  spurious, 
while  Duhm,  op.  cit..,  Kuenen,  "Historisch-Kritische  Einleitung  i.  d- 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  105 

23,  X,  23,  24  bear  the  unmistakable  stamp  of  Jere- 
miah's individuality,  but  they  show,  moreover,  a  very 
close  relationsliip  both  in  language  and  thought  to 
XVII,  5-20,  XVI,  19,  XVII,  14-18.  I  am  convinced 
that  these  passages  all  formed  part  of  one  whole. 
Their  original  order  was  probably  as  follows: 

IX,  22-23,  XVII,  5-8,  X,  23,  XVII,  9-10,  XVI,  19, 
X,  24,  XVII,  14-18. 

Read  in  this  order,  the  various  passages  fit  in  with 
one  another  very  well,  and  show  a  logical  sequence  of 
thought  throughout.  Unquestionably  XVII,  5-10, 
XVI,  19,  XVII,  14-18  are  more  rounded  and  complete 
when  thus  supplemented.  A  translation  of  the  whole 
in  the  order  suggested,  followed  by  an  interpretation 
of  the  same,  will  bear  this  out: 

IX,  22  "Thus  saith  the  Lord,  let  not  the  wise  man 
boast  of  his  ^\^sdom, 
nor  the  mighty  one  of  his  strength, 
nor  the  rich  man  of  his  wealth; 
23  but  if  one  must  boast,  let  him  boast  of  this, 
that  he  understandeth  and  knoweth  me — 
that  he  knoweth  that  I  am  the  Lord,  who 
doth  work  love,  justice,  and  righteous- 
ness in  the  w^orld, 
that  it  is  in  these  things  that  I  take  delight, 
saith  the  Lord. 
XVn,  5     Thus  saith  the  Lord,  cursed  is  the  man  who 
trusteth  in  man, 
and  who  maketh  flesh  his  strength, 
and    whose    heart    is    turned    away   from 
God. 

Bucher  dcs  Alien  Testaments,"  II,  173,  176,  &  Erbt,  op.  cil.,  jogfif. 
throw  out  both  passages. 


io6  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

6  He  will  be  like  the  heath  in  the  desert 
and  will  not  see  when  good  cometh; 

he  Hvethin  parched  regions  in  the  wilderness, 
in  a  barren,  uninhabited  land. 

7  Blessed  is  the  man  who  relieth  on  God, 
and  whose  trust  is  the  Lord. 

8  He  will  be  Hke  a  tree  planted  beside  the 

water, 
that  spreadeth  its  roots   by  the  stream; 
that  feareth  not  when  the  heat  cometh, 
whose  foliage  remaineth  ever  green; 
that  taketh  no  care  even  in  the  year  of 

drought, 
and  never  ceaseth  from  bearing  fruit. 
X,  23  I  know,  O  Lord,  that  man's  way  is  not  of  his 

own  making, 
that  it  is  not  in  the  power  of  mortal  to 

choose  and  direct  ^  his  way. 
XVII,    9  Intricate  ^  is  the  heart,  more  so  than  any- 
thing else, 
and  frail  it  is — who  can  fathom  it? 
10  I,  the  Lord,  search  the  heart  and  test  the 

reins, 
and  to  every  man  is  given  ^  according  to  his 

ways, 
according  to  the  fruit  of  his  deeds. 

^  Read,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX,  Symm.,  Vulg.  halokh  for 
hulekh  and  correspondingly,  hckbcn  for  hakhln. 

^  XVII,  9.  The  adjective,  'aqobh,  seems  to  me  to  mean  not  "deceit- 
ful" or  "arglistig,"  nor  even  "triigerisch,"  but  rather  "intricate." 
This  meaning  accords  both  with  the  following  half-verse,  "who  can 
fathom  it?  "  and  with  the  meaning  which  the  word  has  Is.  XL,  4  and 
Sir.  XX,  6,  viz.,  "rugged  mountain  path"  and  "impassable"  respec- 
tively. 

» In  spite  of  the  var.  led.,  lalheth  without  w^,  the  w*  is  to  be  retamed, 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  107 

XM^,  19  The  Lord  is  my  power  and  my  strength, 
my  refuge  in  the  day  of  need! 
To  Thee  the  nations  shall  come  from  the 

ends  of  the  earth  and  confess: 
Verily  our  fathers  inherited  but  falsehoods, 
empty  beliefs  which  are  of  no  avail. 
X,  24  Chastise  me,  O  Lord,  according  to  justice, 
but  not  in  Thy  [overwhelming]  wrath, 
lest  Thou  reduce  me  to  nothingness. 
XVn,  14  Heal  me,  O  Lord,  that  I  may  be  healed, 
save  me  that  I  may  be  saved, 
for  Thou  art  my  glory. 

15  They,  verily,  speak  unto  me: 

Where  is  the  word  of  God?    Let  it  come  to 
pass! 

16  But  I  have  not  grown  callous  as  shepherd  in 

Thy  service. 
Neither  have  I  wished  for  the  disastrous 

day  ^ — 
Thou  knowest  it,  the  utterances  of  my  Hps  - 
are  everpresent  to  Thee. 

latheth  being  a  case  of  the  emphatic  infinitive  (like  ul'hhaqqei  Ps. 
CIV,  21  and  w^lasbilh,  Am.  VIII,  4);  the  infinitive  of  the  active 
stem  is  used  here  in  a  passive  sense,  as  it  is  in  Exod.  XXXII,  29, 
li'latlict  ''^lekhacm  hajjotn  b<^raklid,  "that  blessing  may  be  bestowed 
upon  you  this  day;"  in  the  present  case  k^  is  the  grammatical  subject 
of  latheth.  The  use  of  the  infinitives  of  the  active  stems  in  a  passive 
sense  is  quite  as  common  in  Hebrew  as  in  the  other  Semitic  languages, 
a  point  which  the  Hebrew  grammars  fail  to  make  sufiiciently  clear. — 
Emphatic  infinitive  seems  to  me  an  appropriate  term  for  the  Semitic 
infinitives,  either  construct  or  absolute,  when  used  with  the  force  of  a 
finite  verb  for  the  purpose  of  emphasis. 

'  By  jom  'aniii,  as  by  jdm  ra'a  of  vv.  17,  18,  is  meant  the  day  of  the 
downfall  of  the  nation,  both  being  cases  of  emphatic  indctcrmination. 

'By  moid  s'phathai,  "the  utterances  of  my  lips,"  Jeremiah  has 
reference  to  his  prophetic  utterances  m  general;  for  this  connotation 


io8  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

17  Prove  not  a  terror  unto  me, 

[but]  be  my  refuge  ^  in  the  day  of  evil ! 

18  Let  my  persecutors  be  dismayed,  but  let  not 

me  be  dismayed, 

Let  them  be  terror-stricken,  but  let  not  me 
be  terror-stricken, 

When  Thou  dost  bring  upon  them  the  day  of 
evil, 

When  Thou  dost  strike  them  with  destruc- 
tion a  second  time." 

Before  we  can  proceed  to  the  interpretation  of  the 
confession  as  a  whole,  several  detailed  points  must  be 
discussed: 

hammithhallel,  IX,  23 — The  nice  distinction,  "If 
one  must  boast,"  or  "  If  one  cares  to  boast,"  is  brought 
out  by  the  participle,  hammithhallel.  One  of  the  uses 
of  the  participle  in  Semitic  languages  in  general  is  not 
to  denote  the  occurrence  of  the  action  as  such,  but  to 
express  what  may  very  properly  be  termed  poten- 
tiality, i.  e.,  the  disposition  or  tendency,  or  predeter- 
mination of  the  subject  to,  or  its  qualification  for  the 
action.^ 

of  the  phrase,  mosd  phi  jahwa  of  Deut.  VIII,  3  may  be  referred  to. 
In  order  to  have  the  meaning,  "my  prayers"  (in  accordance  with  the 
connotation,  "vow,"  which  the  phrase  has  in  all  other  cases),  mosd 
s^phaihai  would  have  to  be  followed  by  an  additional  word,  such  as 
ba'''dam. 

^  Verse  1 7a  shows  that  by  malf'sl  'attd  a  wish  is  expressed.  Nominal 
sentences  e.xpressing  a  wish  or  entreaty  are  quite  frequent,  though  this 
use  of  them  is  often  overlooked. 

2 1  would  suggest  potential  participle  as  an  appropriate  term  for 
this  use  of  the  participle,  several  examples  of  which  I  have  had 
occasion  to  point  out  before  (f/.  pp.  26,  n.  5,  75,  n.  i,  77,  n.  2); 
for  additional  examples  see  infra,  pp.  182,  n.  3,  184,  n.  i,  202, 
n.   2,  and    283,   n.   3.    Though  of   extreme    importance    for   Old 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  109 

In  the  present  case  the  participle,  hammithhallcl, 
suggesting  the  transitoriness  of  all  worldly  glory,  is 
what  gives  the  verse  its  peculiar  tinge  of  sadness. 
This  note  of  sadness,  from  whatever  mood  it  springs, 
runs  tlirough  Jeremiah's  writings  to  such  an  extent 
that  it  may  be  considered  as  fairly  characteristic  of  his 
style. 

"To  every  man  is  given  according  to  his  ways, 
according  to  the  fruit  of  liis  deeds,"  XVII,  lob,  is 
in  perfect  harmony  with  the  first  part  of  the  verse 
(Duhm  and  Cornill  to  the  contrary),  as  also  with 
the  confession  as  a  whole.  ^  Jeremiah  has  reference 
to  retribution  of  a  spiritual,  not  of  a  material  nature. 
The  verse  is  to  be  interpreted  in  the  Hght  of  XII, 
i-3a,  where  the  thought  is  develop)ed  that  not  ma- 
terial prosperity  constitutes  man's  happiness,  but 
rather  that  spiritual  strength  and  assurance  which 
comes  only  to  him  who  lives  a  life  of  righteousness 
and  is  at  one  with  God.  Verse  lob  is,  therefore, 
a  working  out  of  the  central  thought  of  the  con- 
fession, that  man  is  absolutely  dependent  on  God, 
and  that  his  salvation  lies  in  placing  his  trust  in 
Him. 

"But  I  have  not  grown  callous  as  shepherd  in  Thy 
service,"  XVII,  16: — It  is  the  preposition  min  that 
gives  'w5  here  a  meaning  practically  opposite  to  that 
which  it  has  with  or  without  ¥  ret;  similarly,  c.  g., 

Testament  inteqDretation,  this  use  of  the  participle  seems  to 
have  escaped  both  the  grammarians  and  exegctes  almost  en- 
tirely. As  the  full  treatment  of  this  point,  however,  would  occupy 
too  much  space  in  the  present  work,  it  will  be  reserved  for  separate 
pubUcation. 

'The  reoccurrence  of  XVII,  lob  in  XXXII,  19  is  altogether 
irrelevant  for  our  purpose,  as  XXXII,  i6ff.  is  not  a  product  of 
Jeremiah  but  of  a  later  age. 


no  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Hth  lebk  'del  pHonl  means  "  to  mind  "  or  "  take  notice  of 
a  person"  {cf.  Job  VII,  17),  but  Uth  min  pHoni  with 
ellipsis  of  lehh,  "to  leave  a  person  alone"  {ih.,  X,  20); 
or  gara  with  min  rei  means  "to  diminish,"  but  with  f 
personae,  "to  procure"  (ib.,  XV,  8).^  Other  examples 
where  'alfre  has  the  same  grammatical  force  as  here, 
and  practically  the  same  meaning,  are:  I  Sam.  XV, 
31,  wajjasobh  fmu'el  'aJfre  sa'ul,  "then  Samuel  turn- 
ing back,  followed  Saul";  ib.,  XXV,  13,  wajja^lu 
'aJfre  david  k"'arba  me'dth  ^is,  "and  about  four 
hundred  men  went  forward  under  Da\'id's  leader- 
ship." 2 

Jeremiah's  declaration  in  this  half-verse,  that  he 
has  not  become  indifferent  to  his  calling,  notwithstand- 
ing the  taunts  spoken  of  in  the  preceding  verse,  is  in 
accordance  with  such  utterances  as  XX,  yff.,  XV,  10, 

"When  Thou  dost  bring  upon  them  the  day  of 
evil,  when  Thou  dost  strike  them  with  destruction  a 
second  time,"  XVII,  i8b: — Misnce  is  usually  ex- 
plained as  an  accusative  of  specification,  and  misncE 
Hbbaron  sobhretn  accordingly  translated,  "and  crush 
them  with  double  destruction,"  In  view  of  the 
cognate  accusative,  sibbaron,  however,  misncB  cannot 
possibly  have  this  force;  the  modification  would  have 
to  be  expressed  in  this  case  by  an  adjective  attribute, 
or  by  the  status  constructus,  misne — an  emendation 

^  Detailed  proof  that  'iis  min  has  the  meaning  here  stated  must  be 
reserved  for  a  separate  article. 

2  The  scholars  who  emend  meroa  to  meraa  in  accordance  with 
Aqu.  and  Symm.,  overlook  the  fact  that  though  min  may  mean 
"wegen"  denoting  cause  and  reason,  it  cannot  mean  "wegen"  mean- 
ing "concerning"  or  "about";  in  the  only  seeming  exception,  s'mah 
m^'eiaetk  n^'uraekka,  Prov.  V,  18,  the  correct  and  well  attested 
varia  lectio  is  b^'e^aeth. 


CON  FESSIONS  O  F  J  K  R  K  M  L\H  1 1  r 

which  in  fact  has  been  made  by  some  scholars.'  though 
quite  unnecessarily.  MiSiuc  cannot  possibly  be  any- 
thing else  than  an  accusative  of  time,  "a second 
time." 

The  explanation  of  the  phrase,  "a  second  time,"  is 
that  the  prophet  e\idently  had  in  mind  the  i)re\ious 
destruction  of  the  Northern  Kingdom.  Tliis  meaning 
of  mi^ncc  does  away  also  with  the  vindictive  tone 
carried  into  the  verse  by  the  customary  translation, 
"  crush  them  %vith  a  double  destruction."  Such  a  feel- 
ing of  vengeance  on  the  part  of  the  prophet  would  be 
in  jarring  contrast  to  the  lofty  spirit  pervading  the 
rest  of  the  confession. 

This  leads  us  to  the  further  explanation  due  this 
verse.  Verse  i8b  is  not  a  coordinate  clause,  as  it  is  gen- 
erally supposed  to  be,  but  the  protasis  of  i8a.  After 
he  has  just  asserted  in  v.  i6  that  he  has  never  ^vished 
for  that  disastrous  day  to  come,  and  has  called  on  God 
to  witness  that  he  is  speaking  the  truth,  it  would  be  a 
rank  contradiction  for  him  to  beseech  God,  practically 
in  the  same  breath,  to  bring  about  the  downfall  of  the 
nation.-  Besides,  v.  17  shows  clearly,  as  do  in  fact 
Jeremiah's  prophecies  throughout,  that  he  dreads  that 
day  more  than  anything  else — he  even  prays  to  God 
not  to  fail  him  on  that  day  of  evil.  It  is  psycho- 
logically impossible  that  Jeremiah  at  any  time  wished 
for  the  downfall  of  the  nation.  He  believed  the 
downfall  inevitable,   but,    as  we  see  from  his  ser- 

*  By  Kittel,  "Biblia  Hebraica,"  ad  he,  Giesebrecht,  op.  cil.,  ad 
loc,  and  the  Lexica  of  Gesenius-Buhl  and  of  Brown,  Driver,  Briggs, 
s.  V. 

^Duhm,  op.  cit.,  ad  loc.  and  Comill,  op.  cil.,  ad  loc,  noticed  the 
contradiction  in  v.  18,  as  customarily  interpreted,  to  v.  16,  but 
sought  to  solve  the  diiUculty  by  throwing  out  v.  18  as  an  interpola- 
tion. 


112  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

mons  no  less  than  from  his  confessions,  this  was  a 
tragic  realization  for  him,  wliich  constantly  weighed 
on  his  mind  and  colored  all  his  thought  and  feeHng. 
It  would  be  consistent  with  this  frame  of  mind  to  curse 
the  hour  of  his  birth,  as  he  does  XX,  14-18,  to  wish 
that  he  had  never  been  born  to  such  misery  and  de- 
spair, but  it  would  not  be  compatible  with  such  a  state 
of  mind  to  ask  for  the  destruction  of  the  nation.  As  a 
matter  of  fact  he  nowhere  expresses  such  a  wish.  In 
XV,  15,  as  we  have  seen,  the  utmost  that  he  asks  of  God 
is  to  avenge  him  on  his  persecutors,  and  even  this  plea 
he  follows  up  with  the  request  that  God  may  rather  let 
him  die  himself.  And  in  XI,  2off.  he  does  not  ask  for 
personal  vengeance,  but  declares  that  God's  vengeance 
is  bound  to  come,  because  the  people  have  rejected 
him. — XII,  3b  is  misplaced  from  Chap.  XIV;  see  infra, 
pp.  ii6f.  and  iSgf.  XVIII,  21-23,  as  Duhm  rightly 
points  out,  cannot  be  the  work  of  Jeremiah,  inasmuch 
as  they  stand  in  flat  contradiction  to  the  preceding 
V.  20.^  In  the  same  breath  that  he  reminds  God  that 
he  has  interceded  for  the  people  and  sought  to  turn 
away  His  wrath  from  them,  he  certainly  could  not 
give  vent  to  such  implacable  and  fanatic  hatred 
toward  them,  as  is  expressed  in  w.  21-23.  His 
reference  to  having  prayed  for  the  averting  of  their 
doom  shows,  in  fact,  how  fer\idly  he  loved  them.  He 
knew  their  destruction  was  inevitable,  yet  in  his  at 
times  almost  frenzied  grief  at  this  knowledge,  in 
his  recoil  from  the  terrible  prospect,  he  prayed  for 
the  impossible,  for  the  suspension  of  God's  judg- 
ment. 

It  is  clear  therefore  that  XVII,  i8b  cannot  be  co- 

^  See  op.  cit.,  ad  loc.  Duhm's  view  is  shared  also  by  Comill,  op.  ciL, 
adloc. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  113 

ordinate  v^-ith  i8a;  when  it  is  taken,  however,  as  the 
protasis  of  iSa,  the  whole  verse  becomes  an  integral 
part  of  the  prayer,  X,  24,  XVII,  14(1.,  and  shows  any- 
thing but  a  revengeful  spirit. 

The  verse  is  to  be  explained  in  the  light  of  such 
passages  as  Jer.  XIV,  18,  "Yea,  even  prophet  and 
priest  are  bowed  in  mourning  ^  to  the  ground,  void  of 
knowledge,"  Is.  XXVIII,  19,  "Then  it  will  be  sheer 
terror  to  interpret  the  oracle,"  and  the  more  explicit 
ones,  Am.  VIII,  iif.  and  Mic.  Ill,  6f. 

"  Days  shall  come,  saith  the  Lord,  when  I  shall  send 
famine  in  the  land,  not  famine  of  bread,  nor  drouth  of 
water,  but  of  hearing  the  word  of  God.  They  shall 
wander  from  sea  to  sea,  from  the  north  even  to  the 
sunrise  they  shall  roam  to  find  the  word  of  God,  but 
shall  not  find  it."    (Am.  VIII,  iif.) 

"Therefore  it  shall  become  night  unto  you,  that 
ye  shall  not  have  a  vision,  it  shall  become  dark  unto 
you,  that  ye  shall  no  longer  dixine;  the  sun  shall  go 
down  on  the  prophets,  and  the  day  shall  grow  dark 
about  them.  The  seers  shall  be  put  to  shame,  and  the 
diviners  confounded,  they  shall  all  cover  the  beard, 
because  there  is  no  answer  from  God."  (Mic.  Ill, 
61.)— Cf.  also  Ezek.  VII,  26f. 

All  these  passages  refer  to  the  same  fact,  viz.,  that 
the  people,  because  of  the  nature  of  their  religious 
belief,  because  of  their  conception  of  YmvH  as  their 
national  God,  are  bound  to  be  be\vildered  and  con- 
founded when  overtaken  by  their  downfall,  since  this 
will  be  to  them  a  demonstration  of  the  impotency  of 
their  God;  that  they  will,  necessarily,  be  left  without 

1  Read,  as  Giesebrecht  correctly  emended,  op.  cit.,  ad  loc,  iah'ra 
for  iah'ni  and  omit,  in  accordance  with  var.  lect.  and  LXX,  vf  of 
vflo;  cj.  infra,  Part  III,  Chap.  Ill,  §  2,  p.  191,  n.  i. 


114  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

anchorage,  and  without  any  light  to  guide  them 
through  the  darkness  which  will  envelop  them.^ 

Jeremiah's  prayer  for  spiritual  strength  is  in  no 
wise  contradictory  to  the  firm  faith  revealed  in  the 
first  part  of  the  confession.  The  prophet  realizes 
that  there  is  an  essential  difference  between  simply 
knowing  that  a  catastrophe  is  inevitable  and  being 
actually  brought  face  to  face  with  it.  This  prayer  is 
also  perfectly  consistent  with  the  thought  expressed 
X,  23,  XVII,  gi.,  that,  owing  to  man's  imperfection 
and  his  inabiHty  to  fathom  the  depths  of  his  own  being, 
he  is  in  constant  need  of  God's  guidance.  It  is  but 
natural  that  a  man  thus  humbly  conscious  of  his  own 
human  frailty  should  pray  that  his  faith  might  not 
falter  when  the  dreaded  crisis  came. 

This  confession  is  invaluable  to  us  in  that,  like  XV, 
10,  15-21,  it  is  markedly  introspective;  indeed  it  lays 
bare  the  prophet's  inmost  soul. 

Jeremiah  opens  the  confession  by  declaring  that 
neither  material  nor  intellectual  things  are  of  avail — ■ 
only  spiritual  things.  He  continues  that  man  is 
cursed  if  he  rehes  on  material  power  and  human 
strength — he  will  be  unable  to  weather  the  storms 
and  perils  of  Hfe;  but  that  he  is  blessed  if  he  trusts  in 
God — being  firmly  enrooted,  he  will  defy  and  endure 
every  evil  crisis.  There  is  all  the  more  need  for  man 
to  have  trust  in  God,  since  he  is  absolutely  dependent 
on  Him.  Both  his  character  and  his  path  are  pre- 
destined— he  "  can  neither  choose  nor  direct  his  way." 

1  Ezek.  XXXVII,  11  shows  that  this  was  in  fact  the  effect  which 
the  final  catastrophe  produced  on  the  masses  when  it  actually  oc- 
curred: "Son  of  man,  like  these  bones  is  the  whole  house  of  Israel; 
they  speak,  our  bones  are  dry,  and  our  hope  hath  vanished,  we  are 
ruined." 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  1 1 5 

The  m\-stery  of  his  being  he  cannot  understand,  only 
the  Lord  penetrates  and  knows  his  inmost  heart,  and 
deals  with  liim  accordingly.  Then  the  prophet  afhrms 
his  own  reliance  on  God,  his  firm  hope  of  the  universal 
conversion  of  mankind.  In  giving  expression  to  this 
hope,  his  mind  reverts  to  the  trials  that  must  precede 
its  realization.  Hence  the  abrupt  continuation  in  X, 
24,  X\TII,  14-18,  in  which  he  prays  that  God,  who  is 
the  sole  source  of  his  strength,  may  uphold  him  in 
the  hour  of  need,  even  on  the  day  of  the  downfall  of 
his  nation. 

X,  23  recalls  the  consecration  vision,  where  Jere- 
miah declares  that  he  was  prenatally  chosen  for  his 
mission,  that  even  before  his  birth  he  w^as  ordained  by 
God  as  His  prophet  (1,5).  The  two  verses,  X,  23,  24. 
must  be  ranked  among  the  deepest  utterances  of 
Jeremiah.  They  not  only  reveal  the  spiritual  depth 
of  the  man;  they  show  his  remarkable  intellectual 
acumen,  and  prove  to  us,  as  do  also  XII,  i-3a  of  the 
follovving  confession,  that  Jeremiah  had  already  pon- 
dered over  those  problems  which,  over  a  century 
later,  we  find  occup}ing  the  author  of  the  Book  of 
Job. 

(c)  THE  CONFESSION,  XI,   l8-Xn,  3a,   5-6 

XII,  3b,  4  do  not  belong  to  this  confession.  Verse 
4a,  which  speaks  of  the  misery  prevailing  in  the  coun- 
try in  consequence  of  a  drought,  although  it  states 
that  this  calamity  has  been  brought  on  by  the  wicked- 
ness of  the  people,  has  no  thought-relation  either 
to  XI,  18-23  or  to  XII.  i-3a,  5-6;  for  the  subject- 
matter  of  the  former  is  the  persecution  Jeremiah  has 
to  endure  in  his  prophetic  career,  in  particular  what 
he  has  to  endure  from  his  own  priestly  clan,  the  people 


ii6  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

of  Anathoth,  and  the  theme  of  the  latter  is  the  problem 
of  suffering.  It  cannot  be  argued  with  Duhm  (who 
would  show  a  thought-connection  between  v.  4  and 
XII,  1-3)  that  the  wicked,  who  are  principally  to  be 
found  among  the  upper  classes,  suffered  but  little 
from  the  drought,^  for  this  is  far  from  true.  In  ancient 
times  rich  and  poor  aHke  were  affected  by  such  a 
visitation,  a  fact,  which,  as  far  as  Jeremiah's  age  is 
concerned,  is  proved  by  XIV,  1-9,  where  Jeremiah, 
describing  the  great  suffering  that  has  been  caused  by 
a  drought,  points  out  particularly  that  the  rich  are 
not  exempt  from  the  general  privation.  The  original 
place  of  4a  was  with  this  passus,  XIV,  1-9,  a  fact, 
which  has  been  repeatedly  surmised,  but  not  sub- 
stantiated. The  proof  that  the  whole  verse  belongs 
to  XIV,  1-9  will  be  given  in  the  discussion  of  the 
latter  chapter,  our  only  concern  here  being  to  show 
that  it  should  not  be  included  in  the  present  con- 
fession. 

It  will  also  be  shown  that  the  preceding  half-verse, 
3b,  as  far  as  it  is  genuine,  belonged  Hkewise  to  Chap. 
XIV.^     This  half-verse  consisted  originally  only  of 

'  See  op.  ctt.,  ad  he. 

2  See  infra,  Part  III,  Chap.  Ill,  §  2,  pp.  187!.,  iSgf. 

We  have  had  many  cases  of  text-disorder  such  as  this;  they  are 
easily  explained.  They  occur  throughout  ancient  literature,  in  Greek 
and  Latin  as  well  as  in  Biblical  and  other  Oriental  literatures.  In  the 
case  of  a  lengthy  omission,  the  copyist  would  add  the  omitted  passage 
not  in  the  narrow  lateral  margin,  but  in  any  available  blank  space, 
preferably  in  the  available  space  at  the  top  or  bottom  of  the  page. 
There  were  various  methods  of  indicating  the  place  where  the  omitted 
passage  belonged,  a  very  common  one  being  the  repetition  of  the 
words  immediately  preceding  or  following  it.  This,  like  the  other 
methods  adopted,  was  not  understood  by  the  copyists  of  later  times, 
who  mechanically  inserted  such  passages  in  the  body  of  the  manu- 
script at  the  point  where  they  were  found.     Cf.  A.  Brinkmann, 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  117 

haqdi^em  I'Jdm  h^rcgd,  "Consecrate  them  for  the  day 
of  shuighter,"  as  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  hattiqcm 
k'son  rtibhhd  was  not  read  by  the  LXX.  Yet  even  in 
this  reduced  form  it  clearly  breaks  the  sequence  of 
thought,  for  in  XII,  i-3a,  5-6,  the  prophet  is  no  longer 
concerned  with  the  fate  awaiting  liis  persecutors  for 
rejecting  him,  but  \\ath  the  problem  of  sufTering  in 
general,  as  he  has  learned  to  view  it  through  his  own 
particular  case. 

XII,  i-3a  form,  so  to  speak,  the  centre  and  kernel  of 
this  confession.  But  even  apart  from  this,  these  verses 
are  of  the  utmost  importance,  because  of  the  evolution 
of  religious  thought  in  general  wliich  they  show,  and 
because  of  the  insight  they  afford  into  the  prophet's 
mind  and  soul.  It  is  hardly  credible  that  anyone 
should  question  their  authenticity,  for  as  Cornill 
rightly  remarks,  in  refuting  Duhm's  idea  that  the 
whole  passus,  XII,  1-6,  is  a  younger,  postexilic  product, 
"if  anything  in  the  Book  of  Jeremiah  bears  all  the 
internal  criteria  of  genuineness,  it  is  XII,  1-2."  ^  Cor- 
nill, however,  should  not  have  limited  his  remarks  to 
w.  1-2,  for  V.  3a  is  a  vital  part  of  the  thought. 

Jeremiah  opens  the  confession  by  declaring  that 
God's  revelation  has  given  him  spiritual  insight;  then 
he  abruptly  proceeds  to  speak  of  what  he  has  had  to 
endure  in  the  pursuance  of  his  prophetic  task,  what 
has  been  the  immediate  result  of  his  devotion  to  God's 


"Ein  Schreibgebrauch  und  seine  Bedeutung  fur  die  Textkritik,"  in 
"Rheinisches  Museum"  (Neue  FolRe),  LVII,  pp.  481-497;  and  Paul 
Rost,  "Miscellen — Ein  Schreibgebrauch  bei  den  Sophrim  und  seine 
Bedeutung  fiir  die  alttestamentliche  Textkritik,"  in  "Oricnlaliscbe 
Litteraturzeitung,"  VI,  pp.  403(1.,  443(1.,  VII,  pp.  39ofif.,  479^- 
^  See  op.  cil.,  prefatory  remarks  to  XII,  1-6,  pp.  1541. 


ii8  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

"Since  God  has  imparted  knowledge  unto  me,  I  have 

attained  understanding — 
Wherefore  Thou  hast  caused  me  to  suffer  their  evil 

doings"!  (XI,  i8). 

The  meaning  of  i8b  follows  clearly  from  the  con- 
tinuation. The  fact  that  v.  19a  forms  a  circumstantial 
clause,  depending  on  v.  i8b,  admits  of  no  other  inter- 
pretation than  that  by  the  latter  Jeremiah  has  refer- 
ence to  his  persecution.  Only  so  do  we  get  a  logical 
sequence  of  thought: 

"  But  I  have  been  like  a  docile  lamb  led  to  the  slaugh- 
ter, 

not  suspecting  that  they  plotted  against  me : 

Let  us  destroy  the  tree  in  its  sap,^ 

and  let  us  cut  him  off  from  the  land  of  the  living, 

so  that  his  name  will  no  longer  be  remembered " 
(v.  19). 

In  spite  of  their  persistent  hatred  of  him,  Jeremiah 
has  never  been  swayed  by  feeHngs  of  vengeance  to- 
wards the  people,  but  on  the  contrary,  as  we  have 
seen,  has  wished  that  it  might  be  in  his  power  to  save 
them.  Even  now,  though  cast  into  the  dungeon,^ 
he  does  not  ask  for  personal  vengeance,  but  simply 
states  that  God's  vengeance  is  bound  to  come: 

^  hodi''^  occurs  with  this  meaning  again,  Is.  XL,  13,  "and  (who)  as 
His  counsellor  could  impart  knowledge  unto  Him?"  {jodl'acnnu),  ei 
alit.;  'az  expresses  consequence  here  just  as  in  Josh.  XXII,  31;  to  the 
meaning  of  hir'tthanl,  "Thou  hast  caused  me  to  suffer,"  cf.  Ps.  LXXI, 
20.  "Thou  hast  caused  us  to  suffer  {hir'Ukanu)  many  sore  troubles." 

2  Read  b^leho  instead  of  hHahmo,  an  emendation  by  Hitzig  which 
has  been  generally  accepted. 

*  See  supra,  p.  90. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  1 19 

"But  Thou,  O  Lord  Sabaoth.  art  the  righteous  judge, 

who  testest  the  reins  and  the  heart; 

I  shall  see  Thy  vengeance  on  them, 

for  unto  Thee  do  I  reveal  my  cause"   (v.  20). 

The  people  of  Anathoth,  he  continues,  shall  perish 
on  the  day  of  doom  for  rejecting  him,  and  for  threaten- 
ing to  kill  him  if  he  would  not  cease  prophesying 
(vv.  21-23). 

In  XII, I  there  is  another  abrupt  transition.  From 
brooding  over  his  own  persecution,  Jeremiah  is  led  to 
consider  the  problem  of  suffering  in  general: 

"  Absolutely  righteous  art  Thou,  O  God, 

even  though  I  venture  to  dispute  with  Thee — 

yet  of  a  question  of  justice  I  desire  to  speak  unto  Thee: 

Why  is  the  way  of  the  wicked  prosperous? 

Why  are  all  faithless  people  at  ease? 

Thou  hast  planted  them,  hence  they  take  root,  thrive, 

even  }'ield  fruit. 
Near  art  Thou  to  their  mouth,  but  far  from  their 
heart — but  Thou,  O  God,  Thou  knowest  me.  Thou 

seest  me  ever, 
Thou  hast  tried  my  heart  which  is  at  one  with  Thee" 

(XII,  i-3a). 

God's  ways,  he  says  by  way  of  preface,  are  beyond 
human  comprehension — the  divine  world-economy 
must  forever  be  a  mystery  to  man.  Then  he  proceeds 
to  give  the  solution  of  the  problem  in  the  Hght  of  his 
own  religious  experience: — Man  being  centered  in 
God,  finds  true  happiness  only  by  living  in  harmony 
with  the  Divine. 

This  at-oneness  with  God  is  for  Jeremiah  the  real 


1 20  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

prosperity,  the  only  thing  that  counts,  and  the  con- 
sciousness that  he  possesses  this  supreme  good  has 
been  his  solace  in  suffering,  his  strength  amidst  all 
opposition.  His  assurance  might  be  expressed  in  the 
words  of  the  psalmist  later: 

*'If  I  have  but  Thee  (God),  I  care  not  about  heaven 
or  earth."  1    (Ps.  LXXIII,  23.) 

Verses  5  and  6  give  a  new  train  of  thought,  the 
words  of  God  in  answer  to  Jeremiah's  communings: 

"If  thou  racest  with  foot-runners,  and  they  exhaust 

thee, 
how  wilt  thou  compete  with  horses? 
And  if  only  in  the  land  of  peace  thou  feelest  secure, 
what  wilt  thou  do  in  the  majestic  jungle  of  the  Jor- 
dan? ^ 
Yea,  even  thy  brothers,  and  the  house  of  thy  father, 
even   they   have   become   treacherous   against   thee, 

^  The  real  meaning  of  this  verse  is  obscured  in  most  of  the  transla- 
tions. Luther  alone  renders  it  adequately:  "Wenn  ich  nur  dich  habe, 
so  frage  ich  nichts  nach  Himmel  und  Erde." 

2  By  f'on  hajjarden  the  forest  region  extending  along  the  Jordan  is 
meant,  as  is  shown  by  "As  the  lion  cometh  forth  from  the  majestic 
jungle  of  the  Jordan  to  the  banks  of  the  flowing  river"  {'ael  ti^we 
'ethan),  XLIX,  19,  L,  44;  g^'on  is  elliptical  for  g^'onjaar;  the  proof 
of  this  I  find  in  the  k^bhod  ja'ar,  Is.  X,  18.  Similarly  n^we  'ethan, 
which  is  commonly  misunderstood,  and  which  has  even  been  emended, 
is  ellipsis  for  n^we  ifhar  ^ ethan,  and  ja^Ha  is  not  to  be  translated 
"ascendeth,"  but  "cometh  forth,"  cj.  'ala  'arje  misstibkhd,  Jer.  IV, 
7.  The  animals  of  the  jungle  go  to  the  river-banks  not  so  much  to 
drink  as  to  seek  prey. 

There  are  not  a  few  cases  where  elliptical  phrases  have  not  been 
recognized  as  such,  and  where  consequently  the  passages  have  been 
misinterpreted  or  unnecessary  text-emendations  resorted  to,  as  here. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  121 

even  they  talk  without  reserve  behind  thy  back; 
do  not  trust  them  if  they  speak  kindly  to  thee." 

The  relevancy  of  tliis  answer  is  not  immediately 
apparent,  but  there  is  no  doubt  that  these  verses  are 
supplementary  to  3a:  **Thou  hast  tried  my  heart, 
which  is  at  one  with  Thee"  (''tried  my  heart,"  /.  e., 
by  suffering),  and  that  they  are  consequently  part  of 
the  prophet's  general  explanation  of  sutTering.  Jere- 
miah feels  the  hostility  to  himself  growing  more  bitter 
— even  his  immediate  relatives  are  plotting  against 
him;  he  foresees  still  greater  trials  ahead  of  him,  and  he 
girds  his  soul  for  the  combat.  The  prophet  of  God,  he 
tells  himself,  must  mind  no  hardships,  must  shrink 
from  no  trial.  Only  thus  can  he  hope  to  fulfil  his 
mission.  He  is  conscious  withal  that  his  suffering  has 
brought  its  own  compensation,  that  it  has  given  him 
the  spiritual  understanding  wliich  makes  liis  heart  at 
one  with  God,  and  in  the  blending  of  these  two  Hnes  of 
thought  this  confession  offers  a  lofty  solution  of  the 
problem  of  suffering.  The  metaphysical  aspect  of  the 
question  does  not  interest  Jeremiah  further;  it  is  the 
effect  of  suffering  on  man's  spiritual  development  that 
is  to  him  the  all-important  consideration.  In  the 
light  of  its  actual  fruitage,  the  Why  of  human  suffering 
is  of  Kttle  moment. 

(d)  the  coxfession,  XX,  7-1 1,  13 

Vv.  7-10  "Thou,  O  God,  hast  enthralled  me.  and  I  am 
enthralled;  ^ 
Thou    hast    seized    and    overpowered    me. 

^The  usual  translations  of  phlithanl  'd'oacppalli,  "Thou  hast 
deceived  me,  and  I  am  deceived";  "du  hast  mich  betiirt,  und  ich  liess 
mich    betoren";    "...  vcrlockt  .  .  .";    "...  ubcrrcdct  .  .  .," 


122  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

I  have  become  a  constant  target  for  laugh- 
ter; everyone  mocketh  me. 
For  as  often  as  I  speak  I  have  to  cry  out, 
have  to  complain  of  violence  and  abuse, ^ 
for  the  word  of  God  but  serveth  to  bring 

upon  me 
insult  and  derision  without  end — 
And  I  thought  I  will  not  heed  Him, 
I  will  not  speak  any  more  in  His  name; 
but  it  was  within  me  as  a  raging  fire,  shut  up 

in  my  bosom; 
I  strove  to  withstand  it,  but  I  could  not. 
Yea,2 1  hear  the  whispering  of  many,  attack 

on  all  sides: 
inform  on  him,  or  let  us  play  the  informer; 
everyone  of  my  bosom  friends  is  watching  to 

contrive  my  downfall: 
perhaps  he  will  let  himself  be  entrapped, 
so  that  we  may  get  him  into  our  power  and 
take  revenge  on  him." 

The  singular  significance  of  w.  7-9  has  been 
pointed  out  before.^  In  declaring  that  the  voice  of 
God  within  him  has  proved  itself  the  all-controlling 
force  of  his  life,  so  that  he  must  obey  its  bidding  with- 
out regard  for  the  consequences,  Jeremiah  is  speaking 
not  only  from  the  force  of  conviction,  but  from  the 

are  inadequate,  to  some  extent  even  misleading.  In  my  above  render- 
ing of  the  words,  I  have  sought  to  express  more  closely  the  connota- 
tion which  they  are  acknowledged  to  have  here,  viz.,  the  overmaster- 
ing, impelling  force  of  God's  revelation  from  which  there  is  no  escape. 
^  hama's  wasod  are  accusatives  of  specification. 

*  ki,  opening  the  verse,  is  emphatic  kl. 

*  See  supra,  pp.  9  and  2>2,i- 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  123 

fullness  of  his  long  experience,  for  tliis  confession  dates 
from  the  last  year  of  liis  actixity. 

That  verses  of  such  beauty  and  cumulative  force,  as 
7-9,  should  be  the  target  for  text-emendation,  as  these 
verses  have  been  to  all  later  exegetes/  is  diflicult  to 
understand;  particularly,  that  they  should  be  sub- 
jected to  emendations  for  metrical  and  stropliic  rea- 
sons is  well-nigh  inexcusable,  in  \iew  of  the  uncer- 
tainty that  still  prevails  in  regard  to  the  Hebrew  meter 
and  strophic  structure.  Whether  considered  from  the 
point  of  view  of  grammar,  sense,  or  poetic  force,  verses 
7-9  are  unimpeachable. - 

Among  the  changes  made  by  Duhm  and  Cornill  is 
the  combining  for  strophic  and  other  reasons  of 
lifniVethi  kalkhcl  uflo  ^iikhal  with  the  following  verse 
ID  and  the  insertion  at  the  same  time  of  "^nl  after  -uf. 
The  whole  is  then  taken  to  refer  to  Jeremiah's  perse- 
cution. But  Jeremiah's  renewed  outcry  in  v.  10  be- 
cause of  his  persecution,  is  followed  up  in  verse  iia 
b.v  the  emphatic  declaration,  wajjaJrivae  'othi  k'gibbor 
''^ris,  "But  since  God  is  with  me,  I  triumph  like  a 
xiero."  It  is  highly  improbable  that  two  such  con- 
tradictory statements  should   follow  each   other  so 

'  For  the  various  emendations  that  have  been  made  see  Duhm, 
op.  cit.,  ad  loc;  Cornill,  op.  cit.,  ad  loc,  and  "Die  metrischen  StiiciiC 
des  Buches  Jeremia  untersucht,"  p.  27;  Giesebrecht,  op.  cit.,  ad  loc, 
and  "  Jeremias  Metrik,"  pp.  35f.;  Erbt,  op.  cit.,  p.  184;  and  Rothstcin 
in  Kautzsch  ^  and  in  Kittel,  "Biblia  Hebraica,"  oJ /oc. 

2  In  V.  9  the  masculine  form  of  the  second  adjective  phrase,  'ajJir, 
modifying  'el  is  grammatically  unobjectionable  (cf.  Ges.-Kautzsch, 
"Hebr.  Grammatik,"  ^^  §  132,  d).  '"{amolh  is  used  synonymously 
with  lebh  to  connote  emotions  Q'ust  as  in  Ps.  VI,  3f.,  XXXV,  gf.  it  is 
synonymous  with  tiacphaes),  possibly  the  best  English  word  with 
which  to  render  it  is  "bosom";  't'J  boaeraeth,  it  hardly  needs  to  be  re- 
marked, is  an  equivalent  expression  to  'ti  lohcl  or  'ci  laehabha. 


124  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISR.\EL 

closely,  unless  there  were  something  in  the  text  which 
would  show  the  discrepancy  to  be  but  a  seeming  one. 
This  is  not  the  case  however.  Verse  9b  combined  with 
V.  10  makes  a  bald  contradiction  to  the  following  v.  11, 
but  construed  in  the  traditional  way  with  v.  9a,  it 
gives  an  unassailable  text. 

K^gihhor  'arts  of  v.  11  is  appositive  to  ^othi,  and  not, 
as  has  been  generally  thought,  to  jahwae,  or  more 
exactly  'othl  is  both  predicate  of  jahwae  and  virtual 
subject  of  k^  of  ¥gihhor  'arts.  Kimchi,  in  the  thir- 
teenth century,  pointed  out  the  possibility  of  this 
construction.  It  is,  however,  not  merely  a  possible 
construction,  it  is  the  only  possible  construction. 
Not  only  would  the  comparison  here  of  Yhwh  with  a 
*'  valiant  hero,"  or  "  a  terrible  hero,"  as  some  translate, 
have  no  point,  but  inasmuch  as  it  would  arrest  the 
attention,  it  would  take  all  the  force  out  of  the  asser- 
tion, ''  but  God  is  with  me."  On  the  other  hand,  when 
we  translate,  "  Since  God  is  with  me,  I  triumph  like  a 
hero,"  the  thought  is  excellent,  and  forms  an  appro- 
priate finish  to  the  reflections  of  w.  7-10.  More  than 
this,  the  utterance  is  pecuHarly  characteristic  of 
Jeremiah,  revealing,  as  it  does,  the  spirit  which  ani- 
mates all  his  prophecies.  It  might,  indeed,  be  taken  as 
the  keynote  of  his  preaching,  and  for  that  matter,  as  the 
keynote  of  prophecy  in  general;  for,  as  cannot  be  too 
strongly  emphasized,  it  was  the  belief  that  God  was 
with  them  that  moved  the  prophets  to  take  up  their 
mission,  and  that  sustained  them  through  all  the 
hardships  which  the  pursuance  of  their  mission  en- 
tailed. ^ 

*  It  seems  to  have  been  generally  felt  by  modem  exegetes  that  the 
traditional  translation  of  v.  11  was  unsatisfactory,  and  this  was,  no 
doubt,  an  additional  reason  with  Duhm   (in  "Das  Buch  Jeremia 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  125 

The  rest  of  v.  11  accords  in  tenor  and  spirit  with  the 
first  part.  Jereniiah  does  not  give  expression  here  to 
any  feelings  of  revenge,  but,  ha\ing  just  declared  that 
the  Lord  being  with  liini  he  triumphs  like  a  hero,  he 
continues: 

"Hence  my  persecutors  must  exhaust  themselves  and 

accomplish  notliing, 
They  suffer  great  shame,  because  they  succeed  not; 
their  shame  will  never  be  forgotten."  ^ 

In  proof  of  the  fact  that  jikka^'lil  has  here  the 
meaning  "must  exhaust  themselves/'-  and  not,  as 
usually  translated,  "must  stumble"  or  "fall,"  the 
corresponding  passage  in  the  LXX  may  be  referred 
to:  ^iCL  TOVTO  ehCoj^av  kol  voi}aai  ovk  -qhvvavTO.  It  will 
be  seen  that,  though  varying  in  expression,  the  Greek 
is  practically  identical  in  meaning  with  the  Hebrew 
of  v.  iia:  ^  "Hence  they  persecute  me,^  but  accom- 
plish nothing." 

The  confession  closes  in  v.  13  with  a  song  of  thanks- 
gi\ing  to  God  for  delivery  "from  the  hand  of  the  evil- 
doers,"  which  is   clearly  a  reference   to  Jeremiah's 

iibersetzt,"  ad  he),  and  Cornill  (op.  cit.,  ad  loc.)  for  cutting  the  verse 
out  altogether  as  an  interpolation. 

1  Read  in  accordance  with  the  LXX,  k'limmdiham  l^oldm  instead 
of  k^limmath  '  oldm. 

Tor  other  examples  of  kasal  meaning  "to  exhaust  oneself"  or 
"to  be  exhausted,"  cf.  Ps.  XXXI,  11,  Neh.  IV,  4,  II  Chron. 
XXVIII,  is,elalit. 

'  Rothstein  in  Kittel,  "Biblia  Hebraica,"  correctly  retranslated  the 
Greek  text  'al  ken  rad^phU  u^haskcl  lojakholii. 

*  'olhi,  the  nominal  predicate  of  the  preceding  sentence,  is  to  be 
construed  as  object  with  rad'phil,  a  by  no  means  infrequent  construc- 
tion. 


126  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

rescue  from  the  cistern.  The  fact  that  the  confession 
originated  shortly  after  this  occurrence  disproves  the 
objections  raised  by  the  exegetes  against  the  authen- 
ticity of  the  verse  {cf.  supra,  p.  84) . 

Verse  12  cannot  have  formed  a  part  of  the  confes- 
sion originally.  It  is  a  repetition  of  XI,  20,  and,  while 
in  the  latter  place  the  verse  has  a  raison  d'etre,  here, 
after  iib,  it  has  no  force.  In  all  probability  it  was 
added  from  XI,  20  by  some  later  reader,  as  a  marginal 
comment. 

Like  the  preceding  confession,  XI,  18-XII,  3a,  5-6, 
the  confession,  XX,  7-1 1,  13  is  of  extreme  value  in 
fixing  Jeremiah's  importance  as  a  prophet,  and  in 
showing  the  evolution  of  religious  thought  in  general. 
The  realization  of  the  power  of  the  di\dne  \\dthin  the 
human  heart,  and  the  consciousness  of  constant  com- 
munion with  God,  met  with  in  Jeremiah,  mark  a 
spiritualization  of  rehgion  in  a  degree  which  was  not 
reached  before,  and  which  has  not  been  surpassed 
since.  The  fact  that  it  dates  from  the  last  year  of 
Jeremiah's  activity,  and  that  it  is  probably  the  last 
thing  he  produced,  attaches  a  special  significance  to 
this  confession.  It  is  as  if  the  summing  up  of  his 
experience  in  the  opening  verses  7-9,  "  Thou,  O  God, 
hast  enthralled  me,  and  I  am  enthralled;  Thou  hast 
seized  and  overpowered  me  .  .  .  ,"  and  the  exultant 
declaration  in  the  concluding  part,  "Since  God  is 
with  me,  I  triumph  like  a  hero,"  were  meant  to  serve, 
at  the  same  time,  as  a  specification  of  the  spiritual 
legacy  he  was  leaving  to  mankind. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  127 

(e)  the  confession,  XX,  14-18 

"  Cursed  be  the  day  that  I  was  born! 

Let  not  the  day  that  my  mother  bore  me  be  blessed. 

Cursed  be  the  man  who  brought  the  glad  tidings  to  my 

father: 
'  A  male  cliild  is  born  unto  thee ' — 
[and]  filled  him  with  joy.^ 
May  that  man  be  like  the  cities  wliich  God  overthrew 

mercilessly, 
May  he  hear  screams  of  anguish  in   the  morning, 
cries  of  alarm  at  noon-tide. 
Would  that  they  had  killed  -  me  at  birth, 
or  that  my  mother  had  been  my  grave, 
and  her  womb  carried  me  for  all  time. 
Wherefore  came  I  forth  from  the  womb 
to  see  misery  and  woe,  that  my  days  should  vanish  in 

despair?" 

Though  there  is  no  clue  to  the  particular  occasion 
that  called  forth  this  piece,  it  may  be  assumed  that 
it  was  in  an  hour  when  the  prophet  felt  completely 
crushed  by  his  grief,  when  his  cup  of  bitterness  seemed 
full,  and  his  burden  greater  than  he  could  bear. 

In  striking  contrast  to  the  other  confessions,  these 
verses  contain  no  ray  of  hope  or  assurance  to  relieve 
the  gloom,  no  comforting  reflection,  no  transition  of 
thought  whatever.  In  fact,  we  have  not  a  train  of 
thought  at  all,  but  one  single  all-engrossing  thought, 
and  the  whole  is  just  the  passionate  expression  of  one 

*  Verse  15b  is  a  circumstantial  clause. 

'Read  N7  instead  of  i^^;  "^laer  may  be  taken  as  '"lacr  rccitativum, 
introducing'  a  new  thought;  the  3rd  singular  of  mot/t^thani  is  used 
impersonally. 


128  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

mood.  That  the  customary  transition  followed,  that 
a  line  of  thought  got  started  which  changed  the 
prophet's  mood  and  led  to  his  usual  positive  assurance, 
is  most  probable;  that  a  passage  containing  such  a 
sequel  became  lost  in  the  course  of  transmission  is 
possible ;  but  it  is  far  from  my  present  purpose  to  put 
forth  such  a  theory.  It  may  well  have  been  so,  but 
the  point  is  hardly  material  here.  As  it  stands  the 
passage  is  the  expression  of  a  passing  mood,  and,  as 
such,  cannot  invalidate  any  conclusions  that  have 
been  reached  regarding  the  other  confessions. 

In  particular,  it  offers  no  warrant  for  the  inference 
frequently  drawn  from  it,  that  Jeremiah's  faith 
wavered  in  the  end,  that  his  erstwhile  indomitable 
fortitude  and  serene  harmony  broke  down  under  se- 
vere trials  and  gave  way  to  despair  and  discord.^  One 
might  just  as  well  argue  that  Jesus  in  the  end  gave 
way  to  despair,  because  in  his  death-agony  he  cried: 
"EH,  Eli,  lama  sabachthani? — My  God,  my  God,  why 
hast  thou  forsaken  me?  " 

In  regard  to  its  date  only  the  negative  conclusion  is 
possible,  that  it  did  not  immediately  follow  vv.  7-13. 
It  would  be  psychologically  impossible,  as  in  fact  the 
exegetes  grant,  for  such  faith,  such  surrender,  such 
spiritual  exultation,  as  expressed  in  vv.  7-13,  to  be 
followed  immediately  by  such  utter  dejection  and 
bitterness  of  spirit,  as  we  find  in  vv.  14-18. 

Since  these  latter  verses  have  no  internal  connection 
with  the  preceding  confession,  and  since,  as  we  have 
seen,  the  external  connection  or  order  of  any  confession 
has  no  chronological  significance,  the  present  position 

^  Such  an  inference  is  drawn  by  Giesebrecht,  "Das  Buch  Jeremia, " 
pp.  113-115;  Duhm,  "Das  Buch  Jeremia,"  p.  138;  and  Cornill,  "Das 
Buch  Jeremia,"  pp.  235f.,  238f. 


CONFESSIONS  OF  JEREMIAH  i  29 

of  v\'.  14-18,  it  must  be  granted,  is  entirely  fortuitous. 
The  passage  is  the  expression  of  a  mood  into  which  the 
prophet  might  have  fallen  at  almost  any  period  of  his 
life  when  the  torturings  of  his  own  soul  and  the 
slings  and  arrows  of  his  fellow-men  combined  to  op- 
press him.  We  have  reason  to  beheve  that  through 
some  line  of  spiritual  reasoning,  born  of  his  per- 
sonality and  experience,  the  prophet  always  emerged 
from  such  moods  to  confidence  and  buoyancy,  but  in 
this  case,  from  whatever  cause,  the  line  of  reasoning 
does  not  follow.  We  have  simply  an  isolated  expres- 
sion of  despondency,  which  has  no  further  importance 
for  us  than  as  showng  how  keenly  at  times  the  prophet 
felt  the  bitterness  of  his  lot.^ 

'  Cornill's  remark,  in  disposing  of  the  question  of  the  connection 
between  w.  7-1 1,  13  and  vv.  14-18,  may  be  taken  as  a  tacit  ac- 
knowledgment that  the  methodical  interpretation  of  7-1 1,  13  permits 
no  other  conclusion  than  the  one  here  expressed.  He  writes:  "Sind 
alle  drei  Verse  11-13  nicht  ursprunglich,  so  ist  damit  auch  die  grosse 
Schwierigkeit  des  Anschlusses  an  v.  14-18  behoben.  Hatte  der 
Prophet  sich  zu  der  festen  Zuversicht  der  Verse  11-13  durchgerungen, 
so  ware  ein  Riickfall  in  die  iiusserste  Verzweiflung,  wie  cr  14-18 
erfolgt,  psychologisch  unerkliirlich  und  Ewald  belhiitigte  scin  fcines 
Gefiihl,  wenn  er  desshalb  v.  14-18  vor  7-13  stcUte.  Dagegen  als 
Fortsetzung  und  Steigerung  von  7-10  sind  14-18  durchaus  begrciflich 
und  wohl  an  ihrem  Platze,  einerlei  ob  dieser  Zusammenhang  ur- 
spriinglich,  oder  lediglich  Redactionsarbeit  ist." 


PART   II 


CHAPTER   I 

INTRODUCTORY 

Jeremlah's  record  in  the  confessions  of  the  divine 
power  which  controlled  his  inner  life  leads  naturally 
to  the  question  of  prophetic  inspiration,  a  question 
which  is  obviously  of  central  importance  in  any  ex- 
position of  the  faith  of  the  prophets.  For  reasons, 
however,  which  will  become  presently  apparent  we 
shall  preface  our  discussion  of  this  question  with  the 
proof  of  the  statement  made  in  the  General  Survey 
that  Jeremiah  did  not  know  how  to  write. 

JEREMIAH   COULD   NOT   WRITE 

The  question,  how  and  why  Jeremiah  dictated  his 
prophecies  to  Baruch,  has  caused  a  good  deal  of  specu- 
lation among  bibhcal  scholars.  The  only  adequate 
explanation  is  a  very  simple  one,  so  simple  in  fact,  that 
one  must  wonder  that  it  did  not  suggest  itself  to 
modern  scholars. 

It  is  clear  to  my  mind  that  Jeremiah  dictated  his 
prophecies  to  Baruch  because  he  himself  was  unable 
to  put  them  down  in  writing.  Conclusive  proof  of 
this  must  be  seen  in  the  fact  that,  when  Jeremiah 
arranged  for  the  second  collection  of  his  prophecies, 
he  again  dictated  them  to  Baruch,  as  XXXVI,  32 
expressly  states.  If  only  the  first  collection  came  in 
question,  one  might  argue  that  the  fact  that  Baruch 

^33 


134  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

had  to  read  the  prophecies  made  it  seem  expedient 
that  he  write  them  down  in  his  own  hand,  but  no 
such  reason — nor  for  that  matter  any  other  plausible 
reason — can  be  advanced  to  explain  why  Jeremiah 
dictated  his  prophecies  to  Baruch  the  second  time, 
if  he  himself  knew  how  to  write.  The  luxury  of 
a  private  secretary  for  a  man  in  Jeremiah's  walk 
of  hfe  was  unknown  in  those  days;  moreover,  in 
his  enforced  confinement,  lasting  over  ten  years, 
Jeremiah  had  all  the  leisure  necessary  to  attend  to  the 
writing  down  of  his  prophecies  himself,  even  granted 
that  this  would  have  been  a  most  laborious  under- 
taking for  him. 

waaekhtohh  hassepJiaer  of  XXXII,  lo  cannot  be 
taken  as  a  proof  to  the  contrary,  any  more  than  W- 
khathabhtd  and  ukhthohh  'alcshd  (LXX)  'aeth  kol  hadd"- 
hharim  in  vv.  2  and  28  respectively  of  Chap.  XXXVI. 
As  in  the  latter  case,  where  the  account  that  follows 
of  the  carrying  out  of  God's  behest  leaves  no  doubt 
that  vtfkhathahhta  and  k'tJwhh  are  to  be  understood 
in  the  sense,  "have  all  the  words  written  in  it,"  so 
must  waaekhtohh  hassepJiaer  correspondingly  mean,  "I 
had  it  recorded,"  for  the  reason  that  in  Jeremiah's 
time,  precisely  as  to-day,  the  transference  of  real 
property,  in  order  to  be  valid,  had  to  be  duly  recorded 
by  a  qualified  ofhcial.  So  in  XXXVI,  29,  maddu'" 
k athab hta  mesins  "Why  didst  thou  have  .  .  .  written 
down?"  Usage  evidently  sanctioned  the  inexactness 
of  all  these  expressions,  even  as  it  does  in  similar  ex- 
pressions to-day.  We  are  accustomed  to  say,  "we 
filed  suit,"  or  "we  deeded  our  property,"  or  "the  firm 
replied,"  although  in  each  case  the  action  is  accom- 
plished through  an  intermediary. 

The  scholars  who  assume  that,  in  dictating  his 


INTRODUCTORY  135 

prophecies  to  Baruch,  Jcrcmiali  must  have  made  use 
of  more  or  less  copious  memoranda,  which  he  had  made 
at  some  previous  time/  overlook  the  fact  that  there 
would  be  nothing  surprising,  nor  in  any  way  excep- 
tional for  those  times,  about  Jeremiah's  retaining  his 
prophecies  in  his  memory,  and  being  able  to  reproduce 
them  accurately  at  any  time  he  chose.  Both  in 
ancient  and  mediaeval  times,  it  was  not  uncommon 
for  poets  to  produce  and  to  recite  works  of  great 
length  without  resort  to  writing.  It  is  well  known 
that  Wolfram  von  Eschenbach,  the  great  German 
poet  of  the  Middle  Ages,  could  neither  read  nor  wTite, 
yet  he  produced  works  of  great  length,  and,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  practice  of  the  time,  he,  no  doubt,  recited 
them  on  different  occasions.  How  common  illiteracy 
was  among  the  poets  of  that  age  may  be  gleaned  from 
Hartman  von  Aue's  boast  that  he  could  "read  in 
books."  In  ancient  India  the  production  and  preser- 
vation of  all  literature  continued  for  upwards  of  two 
thousand  years  independent  of  writing  and  manu- 
scripts.- 

The  theory  advanced  by  Stade  in  explanation  of 

*  See  Cornill,  op.  cit.,  ad  he.  and  Einleitung,  p.  XXXIX;  Duhm, 
op.  cit.,  ad  lac.  and  on  Cha^).  XVII,  9,  10;  Giesebrccht,  op.  cit,  ad  loc; 
Erbt,  op.  cit.,  p.  7,  n.  i. 

2  An  interesting  case  of  a  highly  developed  memory  in  modem 
times,  though  under  somewhat  primitive  conditions,  came  to  my 
notice  about  twelve  years  ago.  Happening  to  be  in  Samia,  Ontario, 
I  drove  with  a  friend  to  the  near-by  Indian  Reserve,  Moretown,  to 
attend  the  Sunday-morning  service.  The  service  was  conducted  in 
the  Indian  tongue,  with  the  exception  of  the  sermon,  which  was 
delivered  by  a  visiting  Methodist  minister  (a  white  man).  After 
speaking  for  about  fifteen  minutes,  the  minister  gave  i)lace  to  an 
Indian  interpreter,  who  repeated  what  he  had  said  in  Indian.  Then 
the  minister  continued  for  another  fifteen  minutes  and  was  followed 
again  by  the  interpreter.    I  noticed  that  the  Indian  spoke  for  about 


136  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL  J 

the  question,  "  Why  Jeremiah  dictates  his  prophecies 
to  Baruch,"  proceeds  from  a  wrong  premise.  Stade 
remarks:  "£r  tut  es,  well  es  der  Wiederholung  der 
Ekstase  bedurfte,  um  die  friiher  gehaltenen  Reden  zu 
reproduciren,  und  well  man  im  Zustande  der  Inspiration 
redet  abcr  nicht  schreibt."^  ("He  did  so  because  the 
repetition  of  the  ecstasy  was  necessary  for  the  repro- 
duction of  the  sermons  delivered  on  former  occasions, 
and  because  one  can  speak  but  not  write  in  the  state 
of  inspiration.") 

The  error  involved  in  this  reasoning  is  one  very 
commonly  met  with  in  books  on  prophecy.  It  consists 
in  the  failure  to  differentiate  between  inspiration  and 
ecstasy  or  mantic  possession,  that  is  between  the 
revelation  of  spiritual  prophecy  and  the  divination 
peculiar  to  both  the  older  and  the  contemporary 
official  prophecy.  This  failure,  together  with  the 
other  serious  mistake,  referred  to  above,^  of  believing 
the  literary  prophets  to  have  been  "the  leaders  and 

the  same  length  of  time  as  the  minister,  but  that  his  delivery  was 
marked  by  much  greater  fervor.  Being  greatly  interested  in  the  case, 
I  made  careful  enquiry  regarding  the  Indian  and  his  rendering  of  the 
sermon.  I  learned,  (i)  that  he  was  a  man  with  an  easy  command  of 
English,  but  with  only  the  most  elementary  schooling;  (2)  that  he 
had  not  previously  heard  the  sermon  he  translated;  (3)  that  he  had 
reproduced  the  sermon  in  Indian  practically  verbatim,  any  changes 
that  could  be  pointed  out  being  of  a  trifling  and  immaterial  nature. 
Of  this  last  fact  I  received  assurance  from  several  persons  who  were 
conversant  with  both  tongues,  among  others  from  the  chief,  who  had 
some  white  blood  in  his  veins,  and  who  possessed  both  intelligence 
and  school  training  far  above  the  average.  It  was  further  claimed 
that  the  interpreter  could  even  repeat  a  sermon  with  exactness  several 
months  after  hearing  it. 

1  See  ZATW.,  XXIII  (1903),  is7ff.,  159;  "Biblische  Theologie  des 
Alten  Testaments,"  p.  208. 

2  See  supra,  pp.  6 if.,  78. 


INTRODUCTORY  137 

advisers  of  king  and  people  in  important  political 
and  religious  matters,"  ^  even  as  were  the  older 
prophets,  has  caused  confusion  all  along  the  line,  and 
is  particularly  apparent  in  all  the  attempts  wliich 
have  been  made  of  recent  years  to  show  that  there  is 
nothing  unique,  notliing  original  even,  about  Israelit- 
ish  prophecy  or,  for  that  matter,  about  the  religious 
development  of  Israel  in  general. 

To  bring  out  the  radical  difference  between  pro- 
phetic ecstasy  and  prophetic  inspiration,  it  will  be 
necessary  to  enter  with  some  detail  into  a  discussion  of 
the  nature  and  origin  of  each  of  these  phenomena. 
For  only  in  this  way  is  it  possible  to  proceed  with 
certainty  and  to  determine  whether  the  ardent  belief 
of  the  prophets  in  their  divine  call,  with  the  burning 
testimony  to  which  this  belief  drove  them,  was  really 
nothing  more,  as  has  often  been  maintained,  than 
delirium,  enthusiastic  self-delusion,  if  not  indeed  mere 
vague  pretension,  or  whether  it  was  not  rather  the 
outcome  of  a  new  realization  of  the  relation  between 
God  and  man,  and,  as  such,  constituted  religious  pro- 
gress of  a  truly  epoch-making  order. 

'  So  expressed  by  Kittel,  "Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,"'  II,  p. 
438. 


CHAPTER  II 

INSPIRATION   AS   OPPOSED   TO   DIVINATION 
OR  POSSESSION 

The  inspiration  of  the  great  literary  prophets  has 
nothing  in  common  with  the  ecstasy  of  the  prophets 
of  the  older  type — a  state  v/hich  could  be  artificially 
produced  at  will.  It  is  altogether  distinct  from 
prophetic  possession,  as  understood  by  the  ancients 
and  defined  by  Plato  and  Philo,  who  held  that  in  order 
to  become  the  medium  of  divine  revelation,  the  mind 
must  be  in  a  state  of  absolute  passivity.^  Naturally, 
utterances  of  persons  thus  possessed  are  both  invol- 
untary and  unconscious.  The  utterances  of  the  Kter- 
ary  prophets,  on  the  other  hand,  proceed  from  an 
apperceptive  state  of  mind.  As  Robertson  Smith 
expresses  it,  "He  (Jehovah)  speaks  to  His  prophets, 
not  in  magical  processes  or  through  the  visions  of  poor 
phrenetics,  but  by  a  clear  intelligible  word  addressed 
to  the  intellect  and  the  heart.  The  characteristic  of 
the  true  prophet  is  that  he  retains  his  consciousness 
and  self-control  under  revelation."  ^ 

^  "Inspired  and  true  divination,"'  says  Plato,  "is  not  attained  to 
by  any  one  when  in  his  full  senses,  but  only  when  the  power  of  thought 
is  fettered  by  sleep  or  disease  or  some  paroxysm  of  frenzy  "  {Timczus, 
cap.  XXXII,  p.  71,  D).  "Plato's  theory  was  applied  to  the  prophets 
by  Philo,  the  Jewish  Platonist,  who  describes  the  prophetic  state  as  an 
ecstasy  in  which  the  human  vovs  disappears  to  make  way  for  the 
divine  Spirit"  {Quis  reriim  div.  heres,  §  53,  ed.  Richter,  III,  58;  De 
Spec.  Leg.,  §  8,  Richter,  V,  122).— See  W.  Robertson  Smith,  "The  Old 
Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church,"  p.  286,  n.  i. 

2  Op.  cit.,  p.  289. 

138 


INSPIRATION  AS  OrrOSED  TO  DIVINATION     139 

Nor  are  the  visions  of  the  literary  prophets  in  any 
way  akin  to  the  ecstatic  visions  and  dreams  of  the 
dixiner.  There  are  two  distinct  kinds  of  visions  met 
with  in  literary  prophecy.  The  first  comprises  such 
visions  as  those  related  in  Is.  \T,  Jcr.  I,  i-io,  15-19, 
and  also  Am.  VII,  7-9,  in  wliich  the  prophets  tell  of 
the  event  from  wliich  they  date  their  call  to  prophecy. 
As  this  event  is  always  in  the  nature  of  a  spiritual 
experience,  and  as  spiritual  experiences  are  something 
wliich  cannot  be  directly  expressed,  the  prophets  re- 
sort of  necessity  to  an  indirect  method  of  description. 
To  them  has  come  a  divine  moment  when,  as  by  a 
flash  of  light,  they  have  beheld  the  mystery  of  life 
revealed,  when,  as  by  a  sudden  intuition,  they  have 
pierced  to  the  reality  of  tilings,  when  their  individual 
mind  has  stood  face  to  face  with  the  infinite,  universal 
mind  and  realized  itself  the  chosen  instrument  of  God's 
purpose.  Tliis  moment  marks  a  new  epoch  in  their 
existence;  never  again  can  their  life  be  just  as  it  has 
been.  From  this  moment  they  are  pledged  to  God's 
purpose — they  have  found  their  mission.  Such 
spiritual  experiences  are  not  the  fruit  of  an  inert, 
passive  mind,  but  of  a  mind  consciously  sounding  the 
very  depths  of  its  being,  a  mind  awakened  to  the 
fullest  realization  of  its  moral  and  spiritual  constitu- 
tion. 

Such  ex-pericnces,  moreover,  are  invariably  accom- 
panied in  the  human  consciousness  by  the  emotion  of 
the  sublime.  The  mind  is  awed  by  the  sudden  sense 
of  the  infinite,  of  the  newly  revealed  universe  aglow 
with  "the  splendor  of  God,"  and  by  the  perception 
withal  that  it  is  but  "the  hem  of  God's  garment"  of 
which  the  inner  eye  has  caught  a  fleeting  vision.^ 

»  See  Is.  VI,  1-4. 


I40 


THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 


The  mystic  agitation  attending  every  influx  of  the 
infinite  into  the  finite  mind,  attending  every  new 
flash  of  truth  upon  the  soul,  is  nowhere  so  adequately 
described  as  in  that  memorable  account  of  revelation 
given  in  Job  IV,  12-16: 

"  To  me  a  message  stole, 

My  ear  caught  a  whisper  thereof; 

In  the  reveries  of  night- visions 

When  deep  sleep  lay  on  men. 

Fear  seized  me  and  trembling. 

Filled  all  my  bones  with  dread; 

A  spirit  flitted  past  my  face, 

The  hair  of  my  flesh  stood  on  end: 

It  stood  [there],  but  I  could  not 

discern  the  countenance  thereof, 

A  form  before  my  eyes: — 

A  faint  whisper  did  I  perceive." 

These  lines  from  Job  suggest  the  similar  expressions 
from  various  modern  poets  on  this  point.  Schiller's 
"Die  Macht  des  Gesanges"  contains  the  foUowing 
description: 

"Ein  Regenstrom  aus  Felsenrissen, 
Er  kommt  mit  Donners  Ungestiim, 
Bergtriimmer  folgen  seinen  Gussen, 
Und  Eichen  stiirzen  unter  ihm; 
Erstaunt,  mit  woUustvoUem  Grauen, 
Hort  ihn  der  Wanderer  und  lauscht, 
Er  hort  die  Flut  vom  Felsen  brausen, 
Doch  weiss  er  nicht,  woher  sie  rauscht: 
So  stromen  des  Gesanges  Wellen 
Hervor  aus  nie  entdeckten  Quellen." 


INSPIRATION  AS  OPPOSED  TO  DIVINATION     141 

Hamilton  Wright  Mabie  says  in  his  essay,  "The 
Infinite  in  the  Finite:"  "In  quiet  hours,  when  what 
is  called  inspiration  breathes  on  a  human  spirit,  and 
that  spirit  vibrates  into  a  music  unheard  before,  the 
finite  and  the  infinite  blend  for  a  moment,  and  a  fresh 
wave  of  life  flows  into  the  sphere  of  mortal  striving 
and  seeking."  Then  he  cites  the  personal  testimony 
of  a  poet: 

"Writing  poetry  ...  is  like  wading  into  the  sea. 
You  are  cliilled  and  reluctant,  and  tempted  to  turn 
back;  and  wliile  you  stand  hesitating  a  great  wave 
rolls  in  from  the  infinite  and  bears  you  out — you  know 
not  how  nor  wliither."  ^ 

But  possibly  of  the  moderns,  Wordsworth  in  "Tin- 
tern  Abbey"  has  come  nearer  than  any  other  to  an 
adequate  expression  of  the  emotions  attending  the 
sudden  flash  of  truth  upon  the  soul,  the  sudden  per- 
ception of  the  invisible  behind  the  visible,  of  the 
spiritual  back  of  the  material  world: 

".     .     .     that  blessed  mood, 
In  which  the  burthen  of  the  mystery, 
In  which  the  heavy  and  the  weary  weight 
Of  all  this  unintelligible  world, 
Is  lightened: — that  serene  and  blessed  mood, 
In  which  the  affections  gently  lead  us  on, — 
Until,  the  breath  of  this  corporeal  frame 
And  even  the  motion  of  our  human  blood 
Almost  suspended,  we  are  laid  asleep 
In  body,  and  become  a  living  soul: 
While  with  an  eye  made  quiet  by  the  power 
Of  harmony,  and  the  deep  power  of  joy, 
We  see  into  the  life  of  things. 


'The  Great  Word,"  p.  i75f. 


142  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

These  modern  analogies,  to  my  mind,  bring  out 
clearly  the  serious  misapprehension  of  spiritual  proph- 
ecy involved  in  the  views  of  those  scholars  who  con- 
sider the  visions  related  in  Is.  VI,  and  Jer.  I,  i-io, 
15-19  and  the  ecstasies  or  trance  of  the  diviner  psychi- 
cally related  phenomena.    (See  infra,  p.  161,  n.  2.) 

The  second  class  of  visions  met  with  in  literary 
prophecy  comprises  such  visions  as  Am.  VIII,  1-2, 
IX,  1-4,^  Jer.  I,  11-14,  which  also  have  been  thought 
by  Stade  ^  and  other  scholars  to  be  of  an  ecstatic 
nature.  There  is,  however,  nothing  pathological  in 
the  origin  of  these  visions.  They  may  readily  be 
explained  on  a  psychological  basis.  They  reveal  the 
prophet's  state  of  mind.  He  is  haunted  by  thoughts 
of  the  judgment  he  believes  impending,  filled  with 
pictures  of  the  coming  ruin.  Everything  he  sees 
serves  but  to  recall  that  one  momentous  fact — he  can- 
not get  away  from  it.  A  basket  of  ripe  fruit  reminds 
Amos  of  his  people  ripe  for  judgment.  The  almond 
shrub  budding  into  life  in  the  spring  speaks  to  Jere- 
miah of  the  certainty  and  the  speed  of  the  judgment 
which  his  people's  wickedness  has  entailed  on  them. 

Actions,  however,  Uke  those  related  in  Hos.  I,  4,  6,  9, 
Is.  VIII,  3,  XX,  2f.,  Jer.  XIII,  iff.,  XXVII,  iff.,  to 
which  Stade  and  others  also  refer  in  proof  that  ec- 
stasy is  met  with  among  the  literary  prophets,  just  as 
among  the  older  prophets,^  are  not  the  outcome  of  a 

^Am.  VII,  1-6  do  not  relate  mere  experiences  in  the  prophet's 
soul,  as  Stade  believes  (see  "Biblische  Theologie  des  Alt.  Test.," 
p.  126,  §  61,  and  p.  206),  but  external  events,  visitations  by  locusts 
and  drought,  which  had  happened  at  some  time  in  the  past.  See 
infra  Part  III,  Chap.  IV,  §  4. 

^Op.cii.,ih. 

2  See  ZATW.,  ib.,  p.  161,  and  "Biblische  Theologie  des  Alt.  Test.," 
p.  206. 


INSPIR/\TION  AS  OPPOSED  TO  DIVINATION     143 

state  of  ecstasy.  They  are  voluntary  acts  intended  to 
prognosticate  or  prefigure  certain  future  events  which 
the  prophet  felt  sure  were  bound  to  hapjien. 

The  Htcrary  prophets  themselves  took  pains  to 
disclaim  any  connection  between  their  revelation  and 
the  divination  of  the  official  prophets  of  their  day,  or 
the  divination  of  the  recognized  prophetic  guilds — 
which  was  the  same  divination  as  was  practised  by 
the  older  prophets.^ 

Thus  Amos,  in  his  reply  to  Amaziah  (VH,  i4f.),'^ 
protests  emphatically  against  Amaziah's  confusing 
him  with  the  estabhshed  prophetic  guilds,  with  whom 
prophesying  was  a  profession  and  a  business,  and 
points  to  his  divine  call,  to  God's  revelation  within 
him  which  has  driven  him  to  prophesy,  as  the  dis- 
tinguishing mark  between  him  and  the  professional 
prophets,  with  whom  Amaziah  is  familiar. 

Or  take  Micah,  III,  5-8.  Here  Micah  describes  the 
professional  prophets  of  his  time,  who  through  visions 
and  divination  seek  to  secure  the  revelation  of  God, 
and  who,  though  ostensibly  the  spiritual  leaders  of  the 
people,  in  reahty  lead  them  astray  and  work  their 
downfall.  He  drastically  characterizes  their  insincer- 
ity, their  utter  lack  of  moral  convictions  and  princi- 
ples. Then  he  goes  on  to  declare  that  he,  on  the  con- 
trary, is  stirred  by  the  spirit  of  God,  by  the  promptings 
of  his  own  conscience,  and  that,  consequently,  he  has 
the  courage  and  the  strength  to  denounce  the  wicked- 
ness of  his  people: 

^  It  is  recorded  of  Samuel  and  the  bands  of  prophets  directed  by 
him,  and  also  of  Elisha,  that  they  had  recourse  to  divination  (c/. 
I  Sam.  IX,  6,  20,  X,  sf.,  loff.,  XIX,  2(^24,  II  Ki.  Ill,  15). 

*  See  supra,  p.  8. 


144  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

"But  I  am  filled  with  might, 
in  that  I  am  roused  by  the  spirit  of  God, 
the  spirit  of  justice  and  of  moral  power, 
so  that  I  can  tell  Jacob  his  transgression, 
Israel  his  sin."  ^ 

But  the  most  important  passage  bearing  on  this 
point  is  Jer.  XXIII,  9-40,  where  prophetic  inspiration 
is  clearly  defined,  and  the  radical  difference  between 
it  and  divination  exhaustively  set  forth.  In  the  open- 
ing part  of  this  sermon  Jeremiah  scores  the  recognized 
prophets  of  the  day  for  their  immoral  lives  and  their 
evil  influence  on  the  people.  He  denounces  them  as 
false  prophets,  who  have  not  stood  in  God's  council, 
who  but  preach  delusions  spun  out  of  their  own  brains, 
prophesying  prosperity  to  a  country  ripe  for  judgment: 

"Thus  saith  the  Lord  Sabaoth, 

hearken  not  to  the  words  of  the  prophets  that  prophesy 

unto  you — 
They  do  but  delude  you,  they  speak  visions 
which  spring  from  their  own  hearts,  and  not  from  the 

mouth  of  God. 

1  Although  this  verse  is  rendered  accurately  enough  in  the  King 
James'  Version,  it  is  thought  by  most  modern  exegetes  to  require 
emendation — some  scholars  omit  ko^h  'acth,  others  'aeth  ru'^h  jahwce. 
There  is,  however,  nothing  wrong  with  the  verse.  In  the  first  place, 
malethi  forms  a  sort  of  zeugma,  the  objects,  'aethruahjahwa;  mnispat 
ugehhurd,  altering  its  meaning,  "am  filled,"  slightly  to  "am  roused," 
"am  moved;"  with  a  similar  meaning  male  occurs  Eccl.  VIII,  11, 
"...  the  heart  of  man  is  prompted  to  do  evil,"  and  again  Est. 
VII,  s,  ".  .  .  whose  heart  prompts  him  to  do  so."  Secondly,  malethi 
koaJt,  "I  am  filled  with  might,"  and  ^aeth  rti<^hjahwcB  umispat  ugebhura, 
"am  moved  by  the  spirit  of  God,  the  spirit  of  justice  and  of  moral 
power,"  are  in  the  relation  of  effect  and  cause,  which  explains  the 
introduction  of  the  latter  with  'aeth.  Thirdly,  umiSpal  ugehhiira  are 
other  genitives  depending  on  ru<^h  and  explicative  of  ruP-h  jahwce. 


INSPIRATION  AS  OPPOSED  TO  DIVINATION     145 

They  assert  positively  to  those  that  scorn  me, 

the  Lord  hath  spoken.  >c  shall  have  prosperity, 

and  to  those  that  follow  wilfully  the  inclinations  of 

tlieir  hearts 
they  speak,  no  evil  shall  befall  you"  (vv.  16,  17). 

The  mark  of  the  true  prophet,  on  the  other  hand,  is 
that  he  has  held  converse  with  God,  has  become 
possessed  of  His  purpose,  and  must  needs  proclaim  it: 

"For  he  who  hath  held  converse  with  God, 
hath  perceived  and  heard  His  word, 
he  who  hath  hearkened  to  His  word, 
must  proclaim  it"  ^  (v.  iS). 

It  follows  by  implication  that  this  converse  with 
God  is  of  a  moral  nature,  that  is  to  say,  is  through 
the  medium  of  the  moral  consciousness.  The  false 
prophets,  v/ho  have  set  law  and  morality  at  defiance, 
are  shut  out  from  God's  council.  Had  they  held  con- 
verse with  God,  had  they  entered  into  His  purpose, 
like  the  true  prophets,  they  would  know  that  the  judg- 
ment was  imminent,  and  would  of  necessity  preach 
to  the  people  not  prosperity  but  repentance:  - 

"If  they  had  held  converse  with  me, 

they  would  have  to  proclaim  my  words  to  my  people, 

'  Instead  of  wajjisma  ,  the  jussive  Hiph'il,  wajjahna,  is  to  be  read, 
in  accordance  with  jastniil  of  the  parallel  verse  22;  the  jussive  with 
wa  consecutive  here  expresses  consequence,  as,  e.  g.,  wajjamoth, 
XXXVIII,  9.  The  object  d'bharo  of  the  preceding  verb  is  to  be  con- 
strued also  with  -ivajjasma. 

*  Jeremiah's  mode  of  thought  here  is  in  accord  with  his  reasoning, 
IX,  23  and  XXII,  15b,  16;  in  the  former  passage  he  brings  out  the 
idea  that  to  know  or  experience  God  is  to  realize  that  God  controls 
the  universe  in  accordance  with  the  moral  law,  and  in  the  latter,  that 
to  know  God  means  to  live  in  conformity  with  the  moral  law. 


146  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

and  make  them  return  from  their  evil  way  and  their 
wicked  doings"  (v.  22). 

But  how  is  it  possible  at  all  for  a  man  to  hold  con- 
verse with  God?  In  verses  23  and  24  Jeremiah  gives 
the  answer  to  this  very  natural  question:  because  God 
is  ever  present  in  man.  Not  v.  23  as  it  stands,  but 
what  we  must  conclude  was  the  original  form  of  v.  23. 
The  original  text,  as  preserved  in  the  reading  of  the 
LXX,  ^609  iyji^cov  ijd)  elfii  koX  ov'^l  Oeb'i  iroppcodev, 
must  have  read  ^"Hohe  miqqarobh,  or  with  different 
word-division,'  '^Hohim  qarobh  ''^ni  w^lo  ''^Hohe  mera- 
hoq: 

*'I  am  a  present  God,  and  not  a  far-off  God."  ^ 

The  interrogative  particle  with  which  the  verse  now 
opens  was  added  later.  That  the  reading  of  the  LXX 
in  this  case  is  the  correct  one,  cannot  be  doubted  in 
view  of  the  fact  that  v.  24  is  the  logical  and  coherent 
enlargement  of  the  thought  thus  expressed: 

"If  a  man  hides  in  secret,  do  I  not  see  him?  saith 

the  Lord. 
Verily,  I  fill  heaven  and  earth,  saith  the  Lord." 

Further  proof  lies  in  the  fact  that  v.  23,  so  read,  with 
V.  24,  estabhshes  a  perfect  sequence  of  thought  with 
the  preceding  vv.  18-22,  a  sequence  which  is  alto- 
gether lacking  when  the  Masoretic  text  of  v.  23  is 
accepted. 

It  is  significant  that  vv.  23  and  24  express  just  the 
opposite  view  to  that  met  with  in  I  Ki.  VIII,  27 
(II  Chron.  VI,  18):  "But  doth  God  indeed  dwell  with 

^  See  Giesebrecht,  op.  ciL,  ad  loc,  and  Rothstein  in  Kittel,  "Biblia 
Hebraica,"  ad  loc. 


INSPIRATION  AS  OPrOSED  TO  DIVINATION      147 

man  ('acth  ha'adam)  ^  on  earth?  Behold,  heaven  and 
the  heaven  of  heavens  cannot  contain  Thee."  The 
latter  reflects  the  belief  which  prevailed  in  Jeremiah's 
own  age,  and  which  became  more  fully  developed  and 
dogmatized  in  later  Judaism — the  belief  that  God  was 
a  far-off  God,  a  transcendent  God,  enthroned  in  the 
remote  heavens. 

But  the  prophets,  in  particular  Jeremiah,  knew  that 
God  was  present  in  man — had  they  not  experienced 
the  power  of  the  divine  within  themselves? — and  it  is 
out  of  the  fulness  of  this  experience  that  Jeremiah 
declares  that  God  is  not  a  far-off  God,  but  a  near  God 
filling  heaven  and  earth,  an  immanent  God,  that  is; 
a  God  enthroned  in  the  universe,  and  present  in  every 
human  heart. 

It  is  important  to  note  that  the  author  of  Ps. 
LXXIII  uses  very  similar  phraseology  in  express- 
ing his  reahzation  of  the  presence  of  God  in  man's 
heart:  wa'^ni  qirbhath  '"'lohlm  li  tobh,  "But  the  pres- 
ence"—  literally  "nearness" — "of  God  is  my  very  ^ 
happiness "  (v.  28).  That  Jer.  verse  23  became 
changed  to  an  interrogative  sentence  was,  no  doubt, 
as  Giesebrecht  concludes,  for  dogmatic  reasons.  Later 
ages,  failing  to  see  the  real  meaning  of  the  verse,  evi- 
dently read  in  it  a  denial  of  the  omnipresence  of  God. 

Verses  25ff.  are  as  logically  connected  with  vv.  23 f. 
as  the  latter  are  with  vv.  18-22.  Having  established 
the  basic  fact  that  God  is  immanent,  is  a  living  reality 

'The  LXX  read  'aeth  ha'adam  also  I  Ki.  VIII,  27,  from  which 
Benzinger  (contrary  to  Kittel)  rightly  concluded  (in  "Die  Biicher  dor 
Konige"  and  "Die  Biicher  der  Chronik")  that  the  original  text  read 
'aeth  ha'adam  in  Kings  as  well  as  in  Chronicles.  Its  omission  in  the 
Masoretic  text  of  Kings  may  have  been  accidental,  but  it  is  very 
probable  that  it  was  left  out  for  dogmatic  reasons. 

*  The  emphatic  force  of  the  appositive,  '"wi,  may  thus  be  expressed. 


148  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

in  man,  Jeremiah  goes  on  to  show  how,  in  contrast  to 
the  mistaken  notion  of  revelation  and  its  manifesta- 
tions entertained  by  his  contemporaries,  true  revela- 
tion is  the  manifestation  of  the  indwelling  God  in  the 
human  heart. 

The  people,  by  reason  of  their  conception  of  God  as 
a  far-off  God,  looked  upon  the  divine  Spirit  as  an  ahen 
force  entering  the  mind  of  man  from  without,  sub- 
duing his  rational  faculties,  and  making  him  a  passive 
organ  of  revelation.  The  proper  channels  of  di\ine 
revelation  were  thought  to  be  dreams,  ecstatic  visions 
or  religious  frenzy,  as  the  state  of  possession  naturally 
demanded  an  unconscious  or  semiconscious  frame  of 
mind.  Accordingly,  prophecy  for  those  ages  did  not 
consist  in  clear,  connected  thought,  but  rather  in 
muttered  utterances— often  equivocal  if  not  altogether 
obscure— or  in  such  rapturous,  unintelligible  speech 
as  speaking  with  tongues.  Whenever,  as  in  great 
crises,  prophets  of  this  t}^e  acted  in  a  body,  the  frenzy 
would  communicate  itself  from  one  to  another,  and, 
to  a  man,  they  would  frantically  repeat  the  oracle 
uttered  by  the  leader,  as  in  the  case  of  the  four  hun- 
dred prophets  before  Ahab,  led  by  Zedekiah  b.  Ka- 
naanah  (I  Ki.  XXII,  6ff.),  "Stealing  my  words  from 
one  another"  (v.  30)  is  the  way  Jeremiah  puts  it — for 
to  him  prophesying  was  a  matter  of  direct,  personal 
inspiration.  By  wajjm^''mu  n^'um  (v.  31)  he  refers 
explicitly  to  the  muttered,  obscure  oracles,  which 
were  evidently  in  his  mind  also  in  w.  33ff.,  where  he 
contrasts  the  people's  sohcitous  inquiry  as  to  the 
meaning  of  the  massa,  "oracle,"  with  the  direct  and 
immediate  revelation  {ma  'and  jahvcB  uma  dihbacr 
jahwce;  see  infra)  of  the  living  God — living,  i.  e., 
present,  indwelling  in  man's  heart.    By  halloq^hlvi 


IXSPIRATIOX  AS  OPPOSED  TO  DIVINATION      149 

Monam  (v.  31),  it  i^;  reasonably  certain,  the  speaking 
.with  tongues  is  meant.  The  reading  of  the  LXX 
nAQ  points  to  this:  rois  iK^d\\ovTa<;  7rpo(})T]T€ia^ 
( — €tav  A)  yXcoaai)^  ( —  aat}  A).  eV/3a\\. ,  evidently, 
has  here  the  meaning  "utter,"  a  meaning  which  laqah 
may  readily  be  assumed  to  have,  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  the  verbal  abstract. /a ^-^a//,  may  mean  "speech" 
(cf.  Prov.  VH,  21).  The  dative  inslrumcntalis  yXwaar}  ^ 
of  A,  which  no  doubt  is  the  original  reading,  fur- 
nishes the  clue  to  the  grammatical  force  of  I'^onam, 
showing  that  it  is  an  accusative  of  specification. 

With  all  these  irrational,  pathological  phenomena, 
believed  by  his  contemporaries  to  be  manifestations 
of  revelation,  Jeremiah  contrasts  the  evidences  and 
workings  of  true  revelation.  Inspiration,  he  tells 
them,  is  an  elemental  force  which  acts  within  the 
human  heart,  and  with  which  their  imaginary  posses- 
sion by  the  Spirit  has  no  more  in  common  than  "chafif 
has  with  grain": 

"Is  not  my  word  like  fire,  saith  the  Lord, 
like  a  hammer  that  splits  the  rock  asunder?"  fvv.  28, 
29). 

Note  here  the  resemblance  to  XX,  9,  where  he  de- 
scribes his  prophetic  inspiration  as  a  raging  fire  shut 
up  in  his  bosom,  which  he  has  striven  vainly  to  with- 
stand. This  divine  force,  this  inward  fire,  cannot  be 
withstood,  he  says  here,  any  more  than  the  persistent 
force  of  the  hammer  can  be  resisted  by  the  solid  rock. 

•  The  use  of  the  dat.  sing,  (and  not  dat.  plur.  as  in  Acts  IT,  4,  X,  46, 
XIX,  6)  in  referring  to  this  phenomenon  agrees  with  the  expression 
yXwaa-rj  \aXfXv,  of  I  Cor.  XIV,  2,  4,  isf.,  18,  27,  the  New  Testament 
source  which  is  of  supreme  importance  for  our  knowledge  of  this  phe- 
nomenon.   .\s  to  £K/3oL\Aeiv,  absol.,  "  to  speak,"  cf.  Diog.  L.  be,  7. 


150  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

In  the  light  of  w,  28,  29  the  import  of  vv.  35-37  in 
general,  as  of  ma  'andjahwcB  uma  dibbaerjahwcB,  "What 
doth  God  respond  and  what  doth  God  speak?"  in 
particular,  is  clear.  Not  through  such  delusive  and 
artificial  media  as  dreams  and  frenzy,  not  through 
a  perverted  imagination,  the  prophet  means  to  say, 
does  God  reveal  Himself,  but  immediately  and  directly 
to  the  inner  perception  of  man.  Neither  does  He 
speak  by  strange,  oracular  utterances,  but  by  a  clear 
word,  intelligible  to  all.  Equally  apparent  is  the 
significance  of  v.  37,  "  Thus  shall  you  speak  to  the 
prophet.  What  doth  God  answer  thee?  {' anakh  j ahwcz) 
and  what  doth  God  speak?  (dibbaer  jahwcs)."  This 
verse  has  generally  been  thought  to  be  a  meaningless 
repetition  of  v.  35  by  a  later  interpolater,  but  the 
exegetes  have  overlooked  a  very  vital  difference 
between  the  two,  viz.,  that  instead  of  "thus  shall  ye 
speak  to  one  another,'^  (v.  35),  v.  37  has  "thus  shall 
you^  speak  to  the  prophet.'^  It  is  this  variation  that 
gives  point  to  the  repetition,  for  it  brings  out  the  fact 
which  Jeremiah  would  impress  upon  his  hearers,  that 
God  reveals  himself  not  to  the  prophet  alone  but  to 
every  individual — reveals  himself  immediately  and 
unmistakably  in  the  moral  consciousness  of  each. 

Thus  reduced  to  its  essence,  divested  of  all  the 
miraculous  features  and  supernatural  accompani- 
ments which  the  primitive  mind  had  associated  with 
it,  prophetic  inspiration  seems  a  very  simple  matter 
indeed.  Yet  this  view  of  inspiration  was  the  view,  not 
of  Jeremiah  alone,  but  of  all  the  great  literary  proph- 
ets, only  Jeremiah  being  the  most  subjective  and  ana- 
lytic of  them,  he  naturally  gave  it  the  most  reasoned 

^  The  2d  sing,  thoniar  is  here  translated  "  you  ..."  in  order 
to  better  express  its  impersonal  force. 


INSPIRATION  AS  OPPOSED  TO  DIVINATION      151 

out  and  definite  expression.  Amos,  Hosea,  Micah, 
Isaiah,  Dcutero-Isaiah,  every  one  of  them,  there  is  evi- 
dence, when  he  spoke  of  revehition,  meant  the  divine 
force  or  voice  which  he  felt  within  liis  heart.  None  of 
them  claimed  anything  else  than  the  impulsion  of  this 
force,  the  authority  of  this  voice.  It  was  so  simple,  so 
elemental,  so  self-evident  to  them,  that  any  particular 
explanation  or  demonstration  would  have  seemed 
superfluous.  They  all  refer  to  their  inspiration  in  the 
most  matter  of  fact  way — God  spoke  to  them.  The 
earnest  man  of  to-day  might  ponder  over  the  initial 
m}-stery  of  man's  moral  consciousness — not  so  the 
prophets.  For  them  it  was  no  mystery,  it  was  an  a 
priori  fact,  the  manifestation  of  God.  It  was  the 
source  from  which  they  derived  the  moral  vision  and 
the  moral  energy,  which  constituted  their  prophetic  gift. 
To  any  occult  supernatural  power  the  prophets  laid 
no  claim;  against  the  morbid  or  artificial  vision  of  the 
diviner,  the  phrenetic  energy  of  the  sooth-sayer  they 
vented  their  loathing  and  reproach;  they  repudiated 
with  scorn  the  idea  that  they  had  anything  in  common 
with  the  professional  prophets,  never  failing  to  bring 
out  the  distinction  between  their  own  prophecies  and 
vaticination.  Thus,  however  authoritatively  they 
declared  that  the  judgment  was  near  at  hand,  they 
openly  admitted  the  limitation  of  their  human  insight 
in  regard  to  the  attendant  circumstances,  the  How  and 
the  When,  and  the  other  details  of  the  crisis.  Thus, 
e.  g.,  at  the  time  of  the  civil  war  after  the  death  of 
Jeroboam  II,  when  the  two  contending  factions  into 
which  the  country  was  divided,  appealed  to  Assyria 
and  Eg>pt,  respectively,  for  help,  Hosea  predicted 
that  this  foolish  policy  would  prove  the  means  by 
which  God  would  work  their  certain  ruin  (Hos.  VII, 


152  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

I  if.),  but  he  left  it  open  whether  it  would  be  through 
Assyria  or  through  Egypt  that  their  downfall  would 
be  brought  about  {cf.  ib.,  IX,  3,  XI,  5,  and  also  VIII, 
13,  the  latter  as  read  by  the  LXX).  The  fact  that 
they  erred  again  and  again  in  the  matter  of  details  was 
altogether  irrelevant  to  them — their  convictions  re- 
mained unaltered,  their  assurance  of  divine  revelation 
as  abiding  as  ever.  Hosea,  in  the  first  period  of  his 
activity,  predicted  that  the  fall  of  Israel  and  the  over- 
throw of  the  dynasty  of  Jehu  would  occur  simulta- 
neously (Hos.  I,  4f.),  and  though  the  course  of  history 
disproved  his  expectations,  he  persisted,  nevertheless, 
in  his  conviction  that  the  nation  was  doomed.  Sim- 
ilarly, Isaiah,  when  subsequent  events  failed  to  verify 
his  prophecy  at  the  time  of  the  Syro-Ephraimitic 
campaign,  that  in  a  year's  time  Damascus  and 
Ephraim,  and  Judah  as  well,  would  be  conquered  by 
Assyria  (Is.  VII,  14- VIII,  8),  continued  to  declare 
that  the  judgment  was  inevitable. 

Equally  if  not  more  significant  is  the  fact  that  the 
prophets  preserved  unchanged  even  those  prophecies 
which  contained  erroneous  forecasts,  that  is,  fore- 
casts which  had  been  disproved  by  the  actual  outcome 
of  events.  The  fact  is,  the  various  details  of  time, 
place,  and  circumstance  possessed  no  importance  in 
their  eyes.  Such  specifications  were  the  result  of  their 
human  reasoning,  and  as  such  were  non-essentials. 
If  their  reason  erred  in  these  matters,  if  their  judgment 
failed  to  estimate  the  poHtical  situation  correctly,  this 
in  no  wise  invalidated  the  great  basic  truths  or  prin- 
ciples of  which  they  were  cognizant  through  their 
moral  consciousness,  and  which,  constituting  their 
revelation  from  God,  formed  the  centre  and  essence  of 
their  prophecy. 


INSPIRATION  AS  OPPOSED  TO  DIMNAITON      153 

This  explains,  in  the  case  of  Isaiah,  how  it  came 
that,  although  practically  all  his  political  prognostica- 
tions in  his  prophecies  of  the  time  of  the  Syro- 
Ephraimitic  campaign  turned  out  to  be  mistaken,  he 
not  only  preserved  these  prophecies  intact,  but  even 
referred  to  them  in  his  later  prophecies  of  the  years 
704-701  as  the  revelation  of  God  (see  Is.  XXX,  15).^ 
And  so,  too,  it  came  that  when  Jeremiah,  after  twenty- 
three  years  of  activity,  committed  his  prophecies  to 
writing,  he  included  without  alteration  or  adaptation 
his  prophecies  of  the  time  of  the  Scythian  invasion, 
although  his  forecast  of  events  in  these  had  in  no  wise 
been  verified. 

It  mattered  not  to  the  prophets  that  their  con- 
temporaries pointed  tauntingly  to  these  unfulfilled 
prophecies,  and  sought  to  make  light  of  their  prophetic 
gifts  (see  Is.  V,  19,  Jer.  XVII,  15).  They  had  the 
serene  assurance  that  the  essence  of  their  prophecies, 
the  moral  truths  underlying  and  animating  them, 
remained  forever  secure  and  unassailable.  Whether 
destruction  came  from  Assyria  or  from  Egypt,  from 
the  Scythians  or  the  Chaldasans,  whether  it  came 
sooner  or  later,  were  after  all  very  minor  considera- 
tions,- in  no  wase  affecting  the  vital,  fundamental  facts 
j  that  God  was  a  God  of  eternal  righteousness,  that  what 
He  required  of  man  was  to  know  Him  and  to  conform 
to  His  moral  law,  that  Israel,  utterly  failing  in  these 
respects,  was  doomed  to  destruction,  but  that  this 

I  '  See  supra,  p.  76,  and  infra,  pp.  266,  269. 

'  *  This  point  has  been  correctly  referred  to  by  W.  Robertson  Smith, 

I  "The  Prophets  of  Israel,"  p.  268,  and  by  Smend,  "Lehrbuch  der 

I  Alttestamentlichen  Religionsgeschichte,"  p.  192.     Comill's  explana- 

j  tion  of  the  matter  {op.  cit.,  p.  86)  is  altogether  erroneous,  the  premise 

j  from  which  it  proceeds  being  in  reality  nothing  else  than  Plato's 

I  and  Philo's  view  of  inspiration. 


154  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

destruction  was  to  be  simply  God's  means  of  effecting 
its  spiritual  regeneration,  and  of  establishing  His  own 
dominion  throughout  the  world. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  great  prophet  of  the 
exile,  Deutero-Isaiah,  who  lived  amid  entirely  different 
conditions,  and  who,  accordingly,  preached  not  retri- 
bution and  doom,  but  pardon  and  redemption,  held 
essentially  the  same  view  of  inspiration  as  his  great 
predecessors.  The  very  words  with  which  he  opens 
his  prophecies,^  "Comfort  ye,  comfort  ye  my  people, 
speaks  evermore  distinctly  your  God,"  show  that  he 
had  the  same  triumphant  faith  and  spiritual  vision  as 
they,  since  in  the  convulsions  of  the  time,  which,  for 
his  contemporaries,  were  exactly  what  they  seemed ,  he 
beheld  the  manifestation  of  the  divine  Spirit — heard 
the  voice  of  God.  jomar  has  not  the  force  of  a  future 
tense,  but  is  imperfect  of  progressive  duration,  its 
meaning  being  that  God  is  speaking  through  con- 
temporaneous events,  viz.,  through  the  rise  and  the 
growing  victories  of  Cyrus.  But  this  verse,  as  also 
V.  2a,  "Speak  ye  words  of  cheer  to  Jerusalem  and 
proclaim  to  her,"  shows  that  Deutero-Isaiah  regarded 
God's  call  as  addressed,  not  to  himself  alone,  but  to 
all  men — all,  that  is,  that  had  ears  to  hear.  This  is 
shown  by  the  plurals,  "Comfort  ye,  comfort  ye,"  and 
"Speak  ye  .  .  .  and  proclaim."  In  the  following  w. , 
3-8  the  basic  thought  is  brought  out  that  back  of  thej 
visible  perishable  things  of  this  world,  there  is  ai 
invisible,  eternal  world,  viz.,  God  and  His  universe 
plan  of  salvation.  To  those,  therefore,  who  have  the 
spiritual  capacity  to  discern  the  eternal  truths  clothec 
in  the  passing  events,  to  those  is  God's  call  in  the 
opening  lines  addressed.  In  this  way  Deuterc 
1  Is.  XL-LV. 


L\SPIR.\TION  AS  OPPOSED  TO  DIVINATION      155 

Isaiah,  although  he  makes  use  of  different  figures, 
brings  out  fundamentally  the  same  idea  of  revela- 
tion that  Jeremiah  expresses  in  the  conclusion  of  his 
exposition  of  revelation. 

This  conception  of  inspiration  was,  in  fact,  the 
foundation  upon  which  all  the  great  prophets  builded. 
It  was.  of  course,  too  profound  in  its  simplicity  to 
be  within  the  comprehension  of  the  masses,  which 
Deutero-Isaiah  describes  as  "blind  though  they  have 
eyes,  deaf  though  they  have  ears,"  ^  but  by  the 
prophets  it  was  so  acutely  realized  that  it  was,  so  to 
speak,  a  governing  principle  with  them.  It  is  back 
of  all  their  utterances,  it  is  the  sine  qua  non  of  their 
activity.  It  accounts  for  the  spiritual  element  which 
entered  so  predominatingly  into  the  prophetic  move- 
ment inaugurated  by  Amos,  and  which  characterizes  it 
from  the  start  as  something  radically  and  essentially 
different  from  the  rehgious  evolution  that  preceded  it. 
This  point  cannot  be  stated  too  emphatically.  Liter- 
ary prophecy  is  not  the  natural,  hneal  growth  out  of 
the  older  religious  behcfs  and  usages,  but,  by  virtue 
of  the  prophetic  conception  of  revelation  at  the  root 
of  it,  is,  clearly,  the  direct  fruit  of  the  autonomous 
human  spirit,  which,  freed  from  the  fettering  notions 
and  traditions  of  the  past,  has  come  to  a  knowledge 
of  itself  and  to  a  realization  of  the  purpose  and  mean- 
ing of  Hfe — in  other  words,  literary  prophecy  must 
be  accounted  the  spontaneous  creation  of  genius,  the 
immediate  product  of  the  intuitive  human  mind. 

The  religious  advance  marked  by  such  a  conception 

'  Is.  XLIII,  8.  This  was  a  favorite  figure  of  the  prophets  in 
referring  to  the  people's  lack  of  spiritual  comprehension;  cf.  further 
Is.  XLII,  7,  i8f.,  XXXII,  3,  Jer.  V,  21,  Ezek.  XII,  2,  and  also 
Deut.  XXEX,  3. 


156  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

of  inspiration  must  seem  all  the  more  marvellous  when 
it  is  remembered  that  even  Plato,  a  couple  of  cen- 
turies later,  had  not  outgrown  the  primitive,  pagan 
notion  of  revelation,  but  conceived  of  it  as  a  neces- 
sarily irrational  and  subnormal  phenomenon.^ 

For  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  the  human  race 
the  essential  truth  was  distinctly  realized  and  un- 
equivocally expressed,  that  the  relation  of  man  to  God 
is  a  moral  relation,  that  it  is  in  the  conscience  of 
man  that  God  speaks,  that  man's  moral  convictions 
and  promptings  are  the  very  voice  of  God. 

From  this  realization  man's  religious  obligation 
followed  clearly — the  obligation  to  establish  and  sus- 
tain fellowship  with  God,  not  by  means  of  external 
agencies,  rites  or  other  media,  but  by  living  up  to 
the  divine  promptings  within  himself,  by  consciously 
aspiring  after,  and  shaping  his  hfe  and  conduct  in 
accordance  with  the  absolute  perfection  of  God.  Thus 
righteousness  was  realized  to  be  the  link  binding  earth 
to  heaven,  and  morality  became  henceforward  the 
object  and  end  of  religion,  moral  perfection  the 
religious  ideal.  The  picture  of  the  ideal  future  drawn 
by  Deutero-Isaiah  and  also  by  the  Psalmist,  when 
righteousness  shall  descend  from  heaven  to  earth, 
and  heaven  and  earth  unite,  so  to  speak,  for  the 
reaUzation  of  the  perfect  order  of  things  (Is.  XLV,  8, 
Ps.  LXXXV,  12),  was  substantially  the  vision  which 
inspired  the  literary  prophets  from  the  very  start. 

It  follows  from  the  foregoing  discussion  that, 
psychologically  considered,  prophetic  inspiration  is  not 
materially  different  from  the  furor  poeticus  of  the 
master-poet  or  artist.  Both  are  phases  of  human 
genius — prophetic  inspiration  being  human  genius 
^  See  supra,  p.  138,  n.  i. 


INSPIRATION  AS  OrrOSED  TO  DIVINATION      157 

acting  in  the  most  vital  sphere  of  human  interest,  the 
interpretation  of  human  hfe  and  its  rehition  to  the 
universal  Hfe.  Not  that  such  an  explanation  makes 
spiritual  prophecy  a  whit  the  less  mysterious,  or  more 
commonplace,  for  in  its  last  analysis  human  genius 
is  inexplicable,  just  as  are  the  ultimate  relations  of  all 
things,  and  as  is,  above  all,  the  conscious,  moral  life 
of  the  soul. 

And  nowhere  is  the  inexplicableness  of  human  genius 
so  strikingly  exhibited  as  in  the  case  of  the  great 
prophets  of  Israel.  Though  the  prophets,  while 
towering  far  above  the  level  of  their  race,  were  yet  an 
integral,  inseparable  part  of  it,  though  no  external 
influences  of  whatever  sort  had  conduced  to  make 
them  what  they  were,  but  rather  the  accumulated  ex- 
perience of  the  race,  from  which  they  derived  the  ele- 
ments of  their  culture,  and  from  which  each  assimi- 
lated those  elements  most  vitally  related  to  his  own 
being, — though,  in  this  sense,  the  harvest  wrought  by 
each  might  be  traced  back  to  seeds  or  roots  lying  deep 
in  the  history  of  the  race,  yet  in  each  case  fruition 
was  dependent  on  the  fructifying,  vitalizing  principle 
which  sprang,  as  it  were,  from  the  prophet's  own  in- 
dividuality, and  whose  existence  was,  as  it  ever  is, 
independent  of  race,  time,  and  other  circumstances 
within  human  ken. 

Unless  the  action  of  this  mysterious  principle,  which 
is  nothing  else  than  what  we  call  genius,  be  kept  in 
mind,  it  is  impossible  to  account  for  the  inception  of 
prophetic  religion  just  at  that  period  of  Israel's  history 
when  it  occurred.  Between  the  religious  beliefs  which 
prevailed  in  Israel  up  to  that  time  and  the  religious 
views  of  the  prophets  there  is  a  gap  which  cannot  be 
bridged  by  any  logical  process.    The  idea  of  God  which 


158  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

held  sway  in  Israel  at  the  time  of  Amos'  appearance 
did  not  even  remotely  approximate  a  monistic  concep- 
tion of  the  universe.  The  people  believed  in  one  God, 
the  God  of  Israel,  but  granted  the  existence  of  other 
gods  for  other  nations.  A  divine  unity  did  not  exist 
for  them,  and  still  less  did  such  a  conception  exist  for 
the  surrounding  Oriental  nations,  who  believed  in  a 
plurality  of  divine  forces  in  competition,  if  not  in  open 
conflict  with   one  another.^     Indeed,    the   spectacle 

^  There  have  been  efforts  of  recent  years  to  show  that  there  was  an 
"Old-Oriental  Monotheism,"  antedating  the  prophetic  movement  by- 
many  centuries;  and  although  this  is  not  the  place  for  the  detailed 
discussion  of  such  a  question,  it  may  be  in  place  to  state  here  that, 
with  the  exception  of  the  "Hymn  to  Aton"  of  Amenophis  IV  (1392- 
1374  B.  C.)  and  the  religious  reformation  carried  out  by  this  monarch, 
there  is,  prior  to  the  Persian  period,  no  indication  of  even  a  tendency 
toward  religious  universalism  or  monistic  speculation.  (This  will  be 
taken  up  more  fully  in  the  2nd  volume.)  As  to  the  naive  materialistic 
monotheism  of  Amenophis  IV  (Ichenaton),  it  must  be  stated  em- 
phatically that  this  was  neither  the  organic  growth  out  of  the  previous 
religious  development  of  Egypt,  nor  the  point  of  departure  for  a  new 
movement,  but  that  it  was  essentially  an  individualistic  reform, 
beginning  and  virtually  ending  with  Amenophis  IV.  There  is  a 
radical  difference  between  Amenophis'  Hymn  and  the  older  Egyptian 
songs  theorizing  about  the  sun-god,  Amon-Re.  Though  both  have 
in  common  that  they  consider  the  sun-god  the  creator  of  the  world 
and  the  supreme  god,  the  songs  differ  from  the  hymn  in  that  they 
do  not  regard  Amon-Re  as  the  sole  god,  but  only  as  one  among  many 
gods.  Furthermore,  in  the  old  songs  Amon-Re  is  essentially  a  national 
god,  Egypt  alone  being  the  object  of  his  care  and  interest,  while  in  the 
hymn  of  Amenophis  IV  Aton  is  represented  as  a  universal  God  whose 
sphere  of  interest  extends  over  the  whole  world.  But  the  fate  which 
the  reform  of  Amenophis  IV  met  with  at  the  hands  of  his  contem- 
poraries is  the  most  conclusive  proof  that  what  this  great  monarch 
carried  out  was  not  the  result  of  natural  growth  but  of  personal  genius. 
Immediately  upon  his  death  the  whole  country  rose  in  open  revolt 
against  his  religious  innovation,  and  with  a  fanaticism  unparalleled  in 
history  literally  effaced  all  trace  of  his  reform.    Even  his  name  was 


INSPIR.\TIOX  AS  OPPOSED  TO  DIVIXATIOX      159 

which  the  ancient  world  presented  at  the  time  was 
adapted  to  inspire  just  the  opposite  of  idealism  and 
abiding  faith:  it  was  a  world  of  moral  chaos  and 
spiritual  confusion,  a  world  in  which  brute  force 
reigned  supreme.  The  small  kingdoms  were  the 
helpless  prey  of  the  world-powers,  and  hardly  even 
would  these  latter  have  built  up  their  mighty  empires 
on  the  ruins  of  vanquished  nations  than  their  struc- 
tures would  in  turn  be  wrecked  or  threatened  by  new 
rivals.  One  would  expect  such  conditions  to  incline 
the  people  to  a  belief  in  a  blind,  inexorable  fate  rather 
than  to  a  belief  in  a  supreme  being  who  guides  history 
toward  an  absolutely  moral  goal — toward  the  reign  of 
righteousness  among  men.  And  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
from  the  close  of  the  Persian  period,  this  belief  in  a  re- 
lentless fate  as  the  controlling  power  of  the  universe 
took  ever  stronger  hold  of  the  minds  of  the  pagan 
world.  ^ 

expunged  from  the  records  of  his  age,  so  that  both  the  man  and  his 
work  sank  into  oblivion;  only  in  far  distant  Nubia  a  solitar>'  monu- 
ment of  this  monarch  remained  in  the  Temple  which  he  had  built, 
and  which  contained  on  its  walls  his  Hymn  to  Aton.  This  hymn  of 
Amenophis  IV  certainly  exercised  no  influence  whatever  on  the 
subsequent  religious  development  of  Egypt,  and  there  is  no  proof  nor 
even  likelihood  that  it  ever  had  any  influence  on  the  religious  thought 
of  the  other  Oriental  countries. 

^  This  fatalism  of  antiquity,  in  reality,  a  sidereal  fatalism,  has  its 
roots  in  the  astrology  of  ancient  Babylonia,  which,  as  Fr.  Cumont 
remarks,  "was  religious  in  its  origin  and  in  its  principles."  With  the 
close  of  the  Assyrian  and  the  rise  of  the  Neo-Babylonian  empire,  as 
the  research  of  recent  years  has  shown,  astro-theological  speculations 
attained  greater  predominance  in  the  Babylonian  and  Assyrian  coun- 
tries than  ever  before.  From  the  latter  centre,  as  has  further  been 
shown,  astrology  with  its  belief  in  an  absolute  determinism  was  intro- 
duced into  Egypt,  where  in  the  Hellenistic  period  it  was  developed  to 
a  most  elaborate  system  of  religious-philosophical  speculation,  and 
whence  it  spread  over  the  entire  Hellenistic  world.    There  can  be  no 


i6o  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Our  discussion  has  shown  that  the  inspiration  of  the 
literary  prophets  and  the  mantic  possession  or  ecstasy 
of  the  older  prophets  are  two  distinct  phenomena  pro- 
ceeding from  radically  different  states  of  mind,  and 
not,  as  is  widely  thought,  from  a  common  psychical 
basis.  It  has  further  shown  that  inspiration,  as  the 
great  literary  prophets  understood  it,  is  the  governing 
principle  at  the  root  of  the  new  prophetic  movement 
which  began  with  Amos;  and  that,  by  virtue  of  this 
fact,  Hterary  prophecy  is  fundamentally  different  from 
the  previous  religious  development  of  Israel ; — in  fact, 
that  it  can  in  no  sense  be  considered  the  offspring  or 
the  continuation  of  the  older  prophecy,  but  must  be 
regarded  as  a  movement  essentially  independent  and 
sui  generis. 

Certain  points  of  contact  between  the  two  exist 
of  course.  Like  every  great  movement  in  history, 
literary  prophecy  had  its  antecedents  and  forerun- 
ners, among  whom  might  be  named  the  Recha- 
bites,  Elijah,  Micajah  b.  Jimlah,  and  Nathan,  but 
none  of  these  had  advanced  to  the  conception  of  rev- 
elation held  by  the  great  Hterary  prophets,  or  to  the 

doubt  that  the  great  political  upheavals  in  both  the  Oriental  and  the 
Occidental  worid,  which  mark  the  history  of  those  times,  were  partic- 
ularly conducive  to  this  world-wide  spread  of  fatalism.  Cf.  R.  Reit- 
zenstein,  "Poimandres,"  pp.  68ff.,  and  Bousset's  review  of  the  latter 
work  in  "Gottinger  Gelehrte  Anzeigen,"  1905,  pp.  704Q.;  Fr.  Cu- 
mont,  "Les  Religions  Orien tales  dans  Le  Paganism  Romain,"  pp. 
254-269;  W.  Kroll,  "Aus  der  Geschichte  der  Astrologie"  in  "Neue 
Jahrbiicher  f.  d.  Klassiche  Altertum,"  VII  (1901),  pp.  557-577;  Fr. 
Boll,  "Die  Erforschung  der  antiken  Astrologie,"  ib.,  XXI  (1908), 
pp.  103-126;  M.  Jastrow,  "Die  Religion  Babyloniens  und  Assyriens," 
II,  pp.  418-457;  P.  Wendland,  "Die  Hellenistisch-Romische  Cultur," 
pp.  592'.,  8of.;  F.  X.  Kugler,  "Im  Bannkreis  Babels,"  pp.  1 16-126; 
and  J.  Kaerst,  "Geschichte  des  Hellenistischen  Zeitalters,"  II,  i, 

pp.   203f. 


INSPIRATION  AS  OPPOSED  TO  DIVINATION      i6i 

prophetic  \iew  of  the  relation  between  man  and  God 
which  follows  therefrom.^  The  unbridgeable  gap 
between  the  two  forms  of  prophecy  remains  in  the 
basic  difference  between  inspiration  and  ecstasy  or 
possession. - 

'  I  Ki.  XIX  is  not  a  product  by  Elijah,  but  a  narrative  about  him. 
Apart  from  this,  the  storj^  is  not  the  uniform  work  of  one  author,  but  a 
composite  product,  in  which  arc  mirrored  the  conflicting  views  of 
successive  ages  in  regard  to  revelation.  For  the  original  author  of  the 
storj'  Mt.  Horeb  is  still  Yhw^'s  abode  proper,  the  place  par  excellence 
where  His  revelation  is  to  be  sought;  while  the  later  author,  whose 
work  may  be  distinguished  in  vv.  ii-i3a,  is  imbued  with  the  pro- 
phetic idea  of  revelation: — for  him  God  reveals  Himself,  not  in  the 
phenomena  of  nature  (the  hurricane,  the  earthquake,  and  the  light- 
ning), but  in  "  the  still  small  voice."  This  view  of  the  composition  of 
Chap.  XIX  would  explain  the  repetition  of  n'v.  9b,  10  in  13b,  14,  and 
seems  to  me  a  more  satisfactory  solution  than  that  proposed  by 
Wellhausen  in  "Die  Composition  des  Hexateuch  und  der  Histori- 
schen  Biicher  des  Alten  Testaments, "  ',  p.  280,  n.  i. 

2  The  lack  of  a  clear  discrimination  between  the  older  and  the 
literary  prophets  on  this  vital  point  of  revelation  is  a  serious  defect 
in  the  great  majority  of  works  on  Old  Testament  prophecy.  It  is  a 
defect  which  is  found  even  in  so  excellent  an  exposition  as  that  of 
Kittel  in  his  new  edition  of  "Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,"  II,  §§  45, 
46.  Proceeding  from  the  supposition  that  the  inspiration  of  the 
literar>'  prophets  and  the  ecstasy  of  the  older  prophets  are  psychi- 
cally related  phenomena,  Kittel  looks  upon  Isaiah's  and  Jeremiah's 
consecration-visions  as  pathological  phenomena  akin  to  the  ecstatic 
visions  of  the  seers  and  diviners,  and  explains  the  throne.  Seraphim, 
smoke,  altar,  etc.  of  Is.  VI  as  things  which  the  prophet  really  saw 
while  in  the  ecstatic  state  {op.  cit.,  pp.  438,  443-450);  in  reality,  as 
pxDinted  out  above,  these  are  but  the  imagery  which  the  prophet 
employs  to  describe  those  spiritual  experiences  which  elude  direct 
expression.  There  is  nothing  original  or  individual  about  the  imagery; 
it  was  simply  drawn  from  the  stock  of  popular  notions  about  God  and 
supernatural  beings  which  were  current  in  that  age.  What  has  been 
remarked  above  wnth  reference  to  Comill's  explanation  of  the  fact 
that  the  prophets  preserved  without  alteration  or  adaptation  even 
those  prophecies  in  which  their  forecasts  were  contradicted  by  the 


i62  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Nor  does  the  fact  that  ecstasy  is  strongly  in  evidence 
in  the  prophet  Ezekiel  alter  the  situation  in  the  least, 
for,  Stade  to  the  contrary,^  Ezekiel  does  not  really 
belong  in  the  same  category  with  the  six  great  proph- 
ets, Amos,  Hosea,  Micah,  Isaiah,  Jeremiah,  and 
Deutero-Isaiah.  No  matter  how  greatly  he  was 
influenced  by  their  ideas,  he  never  rose  to  the  spiritual 
heights  attained  by  them,  never  caught  the  real  essence 
of  their  doctrines.  The  prominence  which  the  ritual- 
istic religion  occupies  in  Ezekiel's  system  makes  him 
the  very  antipodes  of  the  great  prophets.  And  as  he 
differs  from  them  in  his  conception  of  God  and  of 
man's  relation  to  God,  so  inevitably  does  he  differ 
from  them  also  in  his  idea  of  revelation  and  inspira- 
tion. Smend's  remark  is  to  the  point:  "/w  Sehertum 
hatte  die  Wahrsagung  ihre  Stelle  gehaht  und  heim  Verfall 
der  Prophetic  taucht  sie  bei  Ezechiel  wieder  auf.  In 
merkwiirdiger  Selhsttduschung,  die  seiner  Inspirations- 
vorstellung  entstajnmf,  gestaltet  er  von  hinten  nach 
seine  Weissagungen  nach  der  Geschichte."  ^  ("Reveal- 
ing the  future  had  had  a  place  in  seership,  and,  on  the 
decline  of  prophecy,  it  appeared  again  in  Ezekiel. 
In  strange  self-deception,  which  proceeds  from  his 
idea  of  inspiration,  he  constructs  his  prophecies  back- 
wards in  accordance  with  history.")  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  Ezekiel's  writings  reveal  the  interesting  fact  that 
the  method  employed  by  him  is  closely  related  to  that 
in  vogue  in  Apocalyptic  Literature,  that  is  to  say, 

actual  outcome  of  events,  applies  also  to  Kittel's  view  of  the  "Eigenart 
des  prophetischen  Bewusstseins  und  Seelenlebens"  and  the  "psycholo- 
gische  Form  der  Ausserung  prophetischen  Geistes."  Kittel's  view  is  at 
bottom  nothing  else  than  the  dogmatic  and  pagan  notion  of  revelation 
as  defined  by  Plato  and  Philo. 

1  See  "Biblische  Theologie  des  Alten  Testaments,"  p.  206. 

^Op.cit.,p.  190. 


INSPIRATION  AS  OPPOSED  TO  DIVINATION      163 

a  good  many  of  his  predictions  are  only  disguised  as 
such,  they  are  in  reaHty  vaticinia  post  rocnlum. 

With  this  it  accords  that  the  writings  of  Ezekiel, 
like  those  of  Zachariah  later,  are  manifestly  not  the 
immediate  product  of  inspiration,  but  the  labored 
product  of  speculation  and  study.  If  we  compare, 
€.  g.,  the  visions  of  Ezekiel  (Chaps.  If!.,  Vlllff.)  and 
Zachariah  (in  Chaps.  I,  7-VI,  8)  with  those  of  Isaiah 
and  Jeremiah,  we  find  that  the  vital  element  of 
spontaneity  which  characterizes  the  latter  is  al- 
together absent  from  the  former,  and  in  place  of  it  we 
meet  with  a  minutely  elaborated  symbolism,  which 
serves  as  a  fantastic  garb  for  the  prophet's  theological 
\-iews.  This  s}TTibolic  and  studied  imagery  of  Ezekiel 
(and  also  of  Zachariah),  it  should  be  noted,  has  noth- 
ing in  common  with  the  poetic  imagery  in  Isaiah's 
consecration-vision,  by  means  of  which  the  prophet 
effectively  describes  his  spiritual  experience.  The 
difference  between  the  artificial  method  of  Ezekiel 
and  the  direct  presentation  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah 
may  be  further  illustrated  by  the  fact  that  Ezekiel, 
though  he  devotes  fully  twenty-five  verses  to  the  de- 
scription of  his  vision  of  consecration  (Chap.  I),  de- 
lineating with  great  diffuseness  every  detail  of  the 
apparition,  the  cherubs  with  the  chariot,  the  chariot- 
wheels,  the  firmament  with  the  throne  supported 
by  the  cherub-chariot,  and,  finally,  "  the  appearance  of 
the  One  above  the  throne,"  does  not  until  the  very 
end  communicate  the  fact  that  he  is  facing  God;  while 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah,  in  their  consecration-visions, 
bring  out  immediately  the  dominant  thought  that 
their  soul  was  standing  face  to  face  with  the  Eternal 
and  heard  the  secrets  of  His  counsel. 


PART  III 


CHArXER   I 

HOW    THE    PROPHETIC    UTTERANCES 
BECAME    LITERATURE 

Our  investigation,  in  Part  I,  Chap.  II,  of  Jeremiah's 
persecution  during  the  reign  of  Jehojakim  brought  out 
the  fact  that  the  Temple-sermon,  and  not  the  reading 
of  his  prophecies  by  Baruch  four  years  later,  formed 
the  decisive  event  in  the  prophet's  career,  and  that, 
consequently,  Jer.  XXXVI  does  not  possess  the 
significance  generally  attributed  to  it  for  the  history 
of  his  life.  This  chapter,  however,  is  invaluable  to 
us  in  that  it  gives  definite  enlightenment  on  a  point 
which,  otherwise,  no  doubt,  would  lead  to  much 
vexed  discussion.  As  soon  as  it  is  granted  that  Jere- 
miah spoke  altogether  by  word  of  mouth,  the  question 
naturally  rises  as  to  how  his  prophecies  came  to  be 
written  down  and  preserved;  and  to  this  question 
Chap.  XXXVI  gives  the  answer.  We  learn  that  in  the 
first  place  it  was  owing  to  the  prophet's  own  solicitude 
that  his  prophecies  were  preserved,  and  we  learn  also 
to  what  end  he  wished  them  to  be  preserved. 

Verses  27-32  tell  us  not  only  that  Jeremiah  himself 
arranged  for  the  second  collection  of  his  prophecies 
after  the  first  had  been  burned  by  Jehojakim,  but  also 
that  he  enlarged  this  second  collection  by  adding  to  it 
his  later  prophecies.  Proof  of  the  latter  is  the  state- 
ment, V.  32,  "There  were  added  to  them,  besides,  many 
similar  prophecies."  This  express  statement,  which,  it 
is  important  to  note,  contains  no  specification  as  to 
167 


1 68  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

the  time  when  the  addition  was  made,  can  refer  only 
to  those  prophecies  and  confessions  of  Jeremiah  which 
originated  later  than  the  fifth  year  of  Jehojakim's 
reign,  and  not,  as  Duhm  is  inclined  to  assume,  to  a 
more  complete  collection  of  his  former  prophecies;  ^ 
for  \^.  2,  4  mention  expressly  that  the  first  collection 
contained  all  the  prophecies  which  Jeremiah  had 
dehvered  from  the  day  of  his  consecration  as  prophet, 
in  the  thirteenth  year  of  Josiah,  up  to  the  fourth  year 
of  Jehojakim.  This  interpretation  of  "There  were 
added  to  them,  besides,  many  similar  prophecies"  is 
further  borne  out  by  the  fact  that  there  is  no  mention 
whatever  of  this  addition  in  w.  27-31,  which  relate 
God's  behest  to  Jeremiah  after  the  scroll  had  been 
burned  by  the  King:  "Take  another  scroll  and  write 
in  it  all  the  words  -  that  were  in  the  first  scroll  which 
Jehojakim,  the  king  of  Judah,  hath  burned."  The  only 
addition  mentioned  in  the  behest  is  the  brief  personal 
threat  against  Jehojakim  {w.  30-31). 

Though  not  directly  stated  in  this  connection, 
Jeremiah's  purpose  in  preserving  his  prophecies  is 
ob\dous.  The  fate  his  scroll  had  met  wdth  at  the 
hands  of  the  King  had  shown  beyond  a  doubt  that  his 
prophecies  were  ineffectual  for  his  own  age.  But  the 
prophet  foresaw  other  ages,  when  justice  would  tri- 
umph and  the  truth  have  recognition,  and  to  these 
future  and  more  discerning  ages,  he  was  determined 
that  his  words  should  be  handed  down.  Again  and 
again  he  declared  that  it  was  to  the  future  that  he 
looked  for  the  reahzation  of  his  hopes,  and  through  all 
the  vicissitudes  of  his  career  he  never  failed  to  assert 
his  conviction  that  some  day  some  good  was  bound 

^  "Das  Buch  Jeremia,"  ad  loc. 

2  harisonim  omitted,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX. 


PROPHETIC  LITERATURE  169 

to  come  from  his  prophetic  calling.  Corroboration  of 
this  view  is  furnished  by  XXX,  jf. :  "Thus  saith  the 
Lord,  the  God  of  Israel,  write  all  the  words  that  I  have 
spoken  to  thee  in  a  scroll;  for  verily  days  are  to  come, 
saith  the  Lord,  when  I  shall  make  a  change  in  the 
condition  of  my  people,  Israel  and  Judah,  and  shall 
bring  them  back  to  the  land  which  I  gave  to  their 
fathers,  that  they  may  possess  it  [again]." 

As  to  the  other  prophets,  we  know,  at  least  in  the 
case  of  Isaiah,  or,  to  be  quite  exact,  in  regard  to  certain 
of  Isaiah's  prophecies,  that  it  was  the  prophet  himself 
who  took  care  that  they  should  be  preserved,  and  that 
he  was  influenced  thereto  by  the  same  considerations 
as  those  by  which  Jeremiah  was  moved.  Thus  Is. 
XXX,  8  states  that,  at  the  behest  of  God,  Isaiah  put 
down  in  writing  the  prophecies  which  he  had  spoken 
at  the  time  of  the  aUiance  of  Judah  with  Egypt  (705- 
701),  "in  order  that  they  might  serve  as  a  lasting 
testimony  ^  in  the  days  to  come."  And  in  Chap.  VIII, 
because  of  the  manifest  indifference  of  the  King 
and  the  people  to  his  prophecies  during  the  time 
of  the  Syro-Ephraimitic  campaign,  the  prophet  de- 
clares that  there  is  nothing  left  for  him  to  do  but  to 
entrust  the  message  and  revelation  to  his  disciples  for 
preservation,  so  that  the  purpose  for  which  God 
revealed  Himself  to  him  may  be  ensured  (Is.  VIII, 
16-18). 

It  may  safely  be  concluded  that  the  other  prophets 
were  likewise  intent  on  having  their  prophecies  pre- 
served, for  they  were  one  and  all  convinced  that  the 
fruit  of  their  labor,  the  realization  of  God's  purpose, 
belonged  to  the  future.    No  one  knew  better  than  they 

'  Read,  in  accordance  with  Targ.,  Pes.,  and  Vuig.  la'cd  for  la'ad. 
The  plural,  "they,"  is  in  accordance  with  the  reading  of  the  LXX. 


17©  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

that  the  burning  words  they  addressed  to  their  con- 
temporaries fell  on  deaf  ears;  yet  they  never  doubted 
the  ultimate  efficacy  of  their  labors,  never  wavered  in 
their  hope  of  the  future. 

It  will  not  be  out  of  place  to  point  out  in  this  con- 
nection that  the  probable  reason  why  no  trace  of 
Urijah's  prophecy,  referred  to  in  Jer.  XXVI,  20,  has 
come  down  to  us  is  the  simple  one  that  owing  to  his 
execution  he  had  no  opportunity  of  providing  for  its 
preservation.  The  fact  that  it  was  a  single  prophecy 
would  not  be  sufficient  explanation,  as  among  the 
writings  of  the  Minor  Prophets  we  have  so  short  a 
book  as  Haggai.  (Obadjah,  consisting  of  but  a  single 
chapter,  can  hardly  be  cited  here,  as  the  popularity  of 
the  theme  of  the  pamphlet  would  account  for  its 
preservation  among  the  Minor  Prophets.) 

In  view  of  the  facts  brought  out  above,  it  is  obvious 
that  the  view  referred  to  incidentally  on  pp.  Syf., 
that  the  preservation  of  the  utterances  of  the  prophets 
was  due  to  their  disciples'  initiative  rather  than  to 
their  own  is  untenable.^  And  equally  untenable  is 
another  very  common  view  of  the  origin  of  the  pro- 
phetic writings,  viz.,  that  the  prophets  started  by  put- 
ting into  writing  certain  single  detached  utterances, 
or,  it  may  be,  complete  separate  sermons,  as  an  effect- 
ive means  of  supplementing  their  oral  preaching. 
The  scholars  who  hold  this  view  argue  that,  in  com- 
mitting any  particular  utterance  or  sermon  to  writing, 

*  Of  recent  years,  this  view  has  been  expressed,  with  reference  to 
Isaiah,  by  Guthe,  in  Kautzsch ',  I,  p.  549,  by  Harper,  "Amos  and 
Hosea"  (in  Intern.  Crit.  Com.),  p.  CXXVI,  and  by  Hans  Schmidt, 
"Die  grossen  Propheten  und  ihre  Zeit"  (in  "Die  Schriften  des 
Alten  Testaments"  herausgegeben  von  Gressmann,  etc.,  II,  2,  p.  80); 
and,  with  reference  to  Amos,  by  E.  Baumann,  "Der  Aufbau  der 
Amosreden,"  p.  67,  and  Nowack,  "Die  Kleinen  Propheten,"  p.  121. 


PROPHETIC  LITER.\TURE  171 

the  prophets  meant  to  give  their  hearers  the  oppor- 
tunity of  reading  it  at  home,  when  they  could  give 
more  careful  thought  to  it,  but  that,  more  particu- 
larly, they  sought  by  tliis  means  to  reach  those  who 
were  not  present  at  the  time  they  delivered  their 
message.  For  the  latest  expression  of  this  view 
Kittel,  "  Geschichte  des  Volkes  Israel,"  II,  p.  454,  may 
be  referred  to.  Kittel  sees  in  these  beginnings  of  the 
prophetic  writings  in  the  form  of  separate  sermons, 
or  short  collections  of  single  utterances,  something 
similar  to  tlie  fly-sheets  or  pamphlets  current  among 
other  nations  in  periods  of  poHtical  or  religious  un- 
rest. The  separate  pieces,  he  reasons,  were  in  the 
course  of  time  gathered  together  into  minor  collections, 
and  these  in  turn  into  books.  This  was  the  method 
of  origin,  Kittel  asserts,  "at  least  in  the  case  of  Isaiah, 
and,  probably,  also  in  the  case  of  Amos  and  some 
others,  while  Jeremiah  waits  twenty-three  years  and 
then  issues  a  larger  collection  of  sermons."  Kittel 
grants  in  a  foot-note  that  there  is  no  direct  proof  that 
even  the  book  of  Isaiah  originated  in  this  manner, 
but,  in  accordance  with  the  widely  prevaiHng  view 
of  the  composition  of  the  book  of  Isaiah,  he  thinks 
that  the  way  the  various  sermons  are  combined  in 
the  present  book  of  Isaiah  makes  this  the  probable 
process  of  origin.^ 

^  The  question  whether  in  the  arrangement  of  the  book  of  Isaiah 
there  is  sufficient  basis  for  such  a  view  cannot  be  discussed  here,  but 
must  be  reserved  for  the  detailed  study  of  Isaiah  in  the  2nd  vol.  It 
should  be  remarked,  however,  that  this  view  of  the  origin  of  the  book 
of  Isaiah  is  shared  also  by  Robertson  Smith  in  "The  Prophets  of 
Israel,"  pp.  210,  2i5f.,  235f.,  but  in  "The  Old  Testament  in  the 
Jewish  Church,"  p.  30if.,  he  advances  the  view  presented  in  these 
pages  with  regard  to  the  writings  of  Isaiah  and  those  of  the  other 
prophets. 


172  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

In  regard  to  Klttel's  reference  to  Jeremiah  it  must 
be  pointed  out  that,  when  Jeremiah,  after  the  battle 
at  Karkemish,  committed  his  past  prophecies  to 
writing,  the  thought  of  having  them  sent  broadcast 
among  the  people  did  not  enter  his  mind.  Nor  by 
Baruch's  rehearsal  did  he  mean  to  afford  the  people 
a  better  acquaintance  with  his  prophecies.  He  had 
Baruch  read  his  past  prophecies,  together  with  his 
special  message  for  that  occasion,^  before  the  people 
assembled  from  all  quarters  of  the  country  in  the 
Temple  at  Jerusalem  ^  for  the  reason  that  he  was 
unable  to  deliver  his  message  in  person,  as,  because 
of  the  death -sentence  hanging  over  his  head,  he  dared 
not  appear  in  pubHc.  Had  he  been  able  to  appear 
in  person  before  the  people,  the  probabihty  is  that  he 
would  not  have  resorted  to  the  altogether  exceptional 
step  of  having  all  his  previous  prophecies  rehearsed 
to  the  people,  but  would  simply  have  referred  to  them 
by  way  of  adding  weight  to  the  present  utterance,  and 
as  proof  of  his  prophetic  foresight.  The  events  which 
had  just  transpired  at  Karkemish  were  a  vindication 
of  all  his  past  preaching,  and,  although  he  could  not 
point  this  out  himself  (as  he  was  no  doubt  burning  to 

^  See  supra,  Part  I,  Chap.  II,  §  4. 

^  It  should  be  remembered  that  it  was  customary  for  the  prophets  to 
avail  themselves  of  such  occasions  as  this  for  delivering  their  message, 
unless  the  circumstances  of  the  case  prompted  to  immediate  action. 
Thus  Jeremiah,  four  years  before,  had  on  a  similar  occasion  delivered 
his  famous  Temple-sermon.  Also  Amos  delivered  his  message  at 
Beth-El  during  the  great  fall-festival,  when  that  famous  sanctuary 
was  filled  with  pilgrims  from  all  parts  of  the  country.  And  Isaiah,  we 
know,  delivered  several  of  his  sermons  at  this  season  of  the  year  in  the 
Temple  at  Jerusalem,  e.  g.,  Chap.  XXVIII  (c/.  the  reference  in  vv. 
7-8  to  the  riotous  feasting  of  people  and  priest),  and  XXIX,  1-14 
(v.  I  shows  that  it  was  during  the  festive  season  at  the  completion  of 
the  year  that  the  sermon  was  delivered). 


PROPHETIC  LITERATURE  173 

do),  he  was  determined  the  people  should  understand 
that  the  prophecies  which  they  had  scorned  had  been 
fulfilled.  They  should  be  forcibly  reminded  that  he 
had  foretold  these  very  events,  they  should  be  con- 
vinced that  he  was  indeed  inspired  by  God  (r/.  also 
infra,  p.  207). 

Further,  the  view  of  Kittel  and  others  as  to  the 
motive  by  which  the  prophets  were  actuated  in  put- 
ting their  prophecies  into  writing  is  not  borne  out  by 
the  report,  Jer.  XXXVI,  27-32,  of  Jeremiah's  second 
collection  of  his  prophecies;  for  that  matter,  it  is  not 
borne  out  by  any  of  the  various  passages  in  Jeremiah 
and  Isaiah  which  refer  to  the  prophet's  recording  his 
prophecies  or  to  his  recording  certain  words  or  trans- 
actions, as  the  case  may  be.  There  is  no  suggestion, 
even,  in  these  passages  that  would  justify  such  a  view. 
On  the  contrary,  whenever  the  reason  is  stated  for 
the  prophet's  writing  down  his  prophecies,  whether 
all  of  them  or  certain  ones,  or  for  his  making  any  other 
record,  it  is  invariably  to  tlie  elTect  that  the  document 
or  record  shall  serve  as  a  testimony  for  future  ages. 
This  holds  good  not  only  of  Jer.  XXX,  2f.,  Is.  XXX, 
8,  VIII,  16-18,  which  have  been  dwelt  upon  above, 
but  also  of  Jer.  XXXII,  10-15,  which  relate  how 
Jeremiah  took  pains  to  preserve  the  deed  of  the  pur- 
chase when  he  bought  the  land  from  his  cousin 
Hanamel.^  Also  when  Isaiah,  at  the  time  of  the  Syro- 
Ephraimitic  campaign,  summarized  his  prediction 
in  the  words,  " Maher-shalal-hash-baz " — "Spoil  is 
speedy,  plunder  is  hasty" — and  engraved  the  words, 
in  the  presence  of  witnesses,  on  a  tablet,  he  did  it,  as 
even  Kittel  acknowledges,  in  order  that,  when  his 
forecast  would  be  proved  true  by  events,  there  should 
^  CJ.  supra,  p.  19. 


174  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

be  documentary  evidence  of  his  prediction  to  that 
effect. 

Finally,  the  view  of  Kittel  and  others  of  the  origin 
of  the  prophetic  writings  presupposes  that  the  people 
manifested  a  general  interest  in  the  preaching  of  the 
prophets,  while  every  utterance  of  the  prophets  is 
evidence  that  the  very  opposite  was  the  case.^ 

Naturally,  in  discussing  how  the  prophetic  utter- 
ances came  to  be  put  down  in  writing,  there  can  be 
reference  only  to  the  preexilic  prophets,  who  delivered 
their  messages  in  the  first  place  by  word  of  mouth. 
In  the  case  of  Deutero-Isaiah  there  can  hardly  be  any 
doubt  that  his  writings.  Is.  XL-LV,  had  book-form 
from  the  very  first.  They  are  not  a  series  of  separate 
detached  sermons  or  messages,  like  the  writings  of  the 
preexiHc  prophets,  but  form  one  continuous  discourse. 
Regarding  the  manner  of  their  circulation,  they  offer 
no  clue  as  to  whether  they  were  sent  broadcast 
among  the  Jewish  captivity,  or  whether  their  author 
delivered  them  personally  before  a  large  assembly  of 
the  exiles;  but,  from  what  we  know  in  general  about 
the  conditions  and  customs  of  those  times,  the  latter 
would  seem  to  be  the  more  likely  theory.  As  to 
Ezekiel  and  Zachariah,  there  is  no  room  for  any  ques- 
tion— their  writings,  as  pointed  out  above,  are  not  the 
spontaneous  product  of  the  intuitive,  but  the  studied 
product  of  the  speculative  faculty,  and  there  can  be 
no  doubt  that  their  earliest  formulation  was  in 
writing. 

From  the  fact,  that  the  great  preexilic  prophets 
showed  such  solicitude  for  the  preservation  of  their 
prophecies,  it  follows  that  the  term,  ''literary  proph- 
ecy," is  by  no  means  a  misleading  term,  Stade  to  the 

^  Cj.  infra,  pp.  266f.,  2945. 


PROPHETIC  LITERATURE  175 

contrary,^  but  rather  a  most  appropriate  one,  par- 
ticularly suited  to  bring  out  an  essential  point  of 
difference  between  the  older  prophecy  and  the  new 
movement  marked  by  the  appearance  of  Amos.  The 
older  prophets  were  concerned  about  the  present; 
their  vision  and  their  energy  were  directed  to  the 
events  of  the  hour;  their  purpose  embraced  only  their 
own  times  and  their  own  countrymen.  The  newer 
prophets  beheld  a  scheme  reaching  into  the  far  future; 
they  were  more  vitally  concerned  about  the  ultimate 
working  out  of  this  scheme  than  about  the  affairs  of 
their  own  day;  their  message  was  not  for  their  com- 
patriots or  contemporaries  alone,  but  for  all  men  in 
the  days  to  come — hence  the  necessity  for  its  preserva- 
tion in  writing;  their  vision  and  their  purpose  were 
centered  in  that  ideal  future  which  should  some  day 
come  to  pass. 

»  See  "Biblische  Theologie  des  Alt.  Test.,"  pp.  2o^i.,  and  ZATW., 
XXIII,  p.  161. 


CHAPTER  II 

THE   PROPHETS    BELIEVE   THE    DOOM 
INEVITABLE 

If  the  essential  point  of  difference  between  the  older 
and  the  literary  prophets  dwelt  on  in  the  preceding 
chapter  is  borne  in  mind,  the  question,  whether  the 
prophets'  announcements  of  judgment  are  to  be  con- 
sidered as  conditional  or  as  absolute  predictions,  is 
a  very  simple  one.  That  there  is  a  division  of  opinion 
among  the  scholars  on  this  question  is  to  be  attributed 
to  the  fact  that  the  presentation  commonly  given  of 
preexilic  prophecy  gives  undue  prominence  to  the 
prophets '  preaching  of  doom  and  somewhat  obscures 
the  more  essential  feature  of  their  preaching.  If  the 
main  stress  is  laid  on  the  prophets'  forecasting  of 
doom,  and  their  preaching  considered  principally  from 
this  point  of  view,  one  would  have  to  conclude  with 
Volz  and  others  that  the  prophets  "to  the  very  last 
hoped  for  the  conversion  of  the  people  and  the  warding 
off  of  the  judgment,"  that  "only  on  this  supposition 
their  preaching  and  especially  the  putting  down  of 
their  sermons  in  writing  has  sense;"  ^  or  one  would 
have  to  grant  the  validity  of  the  argument  which 
Giesebrecht  advances  in  contesting  the  view  of  Smend, 
that  the  prophets  look  forward  to  the  catastrophe  as 

^  See  "Die  vorexilische  Jahveprophetie  und  der  Messias"  (1897), 
p.  8;  and  among  others  also  Stade  "Biblische  Theologic  des  Alt. 
Test.'s,"  §  107,  and  E.  Kautzsch,  "Die  Biblische  Theologie  des  Alten 
Testaments"  (i9ii),pp.  20if.,  2511!. 
176 


THE  DOOM  INEVITABLE  177 

inevitable  (op.  cil.,  191,  194).  "Why,"  Giesebrccht 
asks,  "do  the  prophets  not  confine  themselves  to  a  few 
oracularutterancesannouncing  the  disaster  that  threat- 
ens them?  Why  do  they  take  such  pains  to  show  the 
people  their  iniquity  and  to  awaken  in  them  a  belief 
in  their  approacliing  disaster?  Wliy  do  they  waste  so 
many  words  if  they  know  beforehand  that  no  amount 
of  talking  will  avail?"  ^ 

But  when  the  vital  factor  of  the  prophetic  preaching 
is  taken  into  consideration,  the  transcendent  faith  of 
the  prophets  in  the  final  triumph  of  righteousness  and 
their  beHcf  in  the  subservience  of  present  events  to 
this  great  end,  there  is  no  room  for  such  reasoning. 
Nor  is   there   room   for   the   theory  entertained   by 
Duhm,-  Cornill,^  and  Henry  P.  Smith  ^  in  regard  to 
Jeremiah,  and  by  W.  Staerk  ^  in  regard  to  Amos  and 
Hosea,  that,  at  least  at  the  beginning  of  their  activity, 
the  prophets  hoped  that  the  people  might  be  affected 
by  their  preaching  and  that  thus  the  doom  might  be 
averted.    A  systematic  interpretation  of  the  prophetic  A 
writings  shows  that  at  no  time  of  their  activity  did  1 
the  prophets  entertain  such  a  hope.    They  were  aware  \  ^^ 
from  the  outset  that  they  were  preaching  to  deaf  ears,    ) 
for  they  fully  realized  the  insuperable  difference  in  re-    j 
ligious  views  which  separated  them  from  the  people;    I 
and  they  did  not  fail  to  make  clear  their  belief  that  by  / 

1  "Die  Berufsbegabungder  Alttestamentlichen  Propheten"  (1897), 
p.  82. 

'Op.  cit.,  general  remarks  on  Chaps.  II- IV,  4,  and  IV,  5-VI,  p.  47I. 

'  "Das  Buch  Jercmia,"  Einlcitung,  p.  XXVIII,  and  p.  36. 

*  "Old  Testament  History,"  p.  290. 

'"Das  Assyrische  Wcltreich  im  Urtcile  dor  Propheten"  (1908), 
pp.  14,  38fT.;  this  view  is  taken  also  by  Mcinhold,  "Studicn  zur 
Israeli tischen  Religionsgeschichte,"  pp.  43fl.,  and  Harper,  ".Amos  and 
Hosea,"  p.  CXX. 


178  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

nothing  short  of  the  overthrow  of  the  whole  religious- 
social  structure  could  the  people  be  brought  to  the 
realization  of  their  delusions  and  superstitious  beliefs. 
It  was  for  the  furtherance  of  the  ultimate  purpose 
which  the  prophets  beHeved  God  pursued  in  calling 
them,  and  not  because  they  hoped  their  exhortations 
might  be  heeded  by  their  contemporaries,  that  they 
took  pains  to  set  forth  how  the  doom  might  be  averted. 
If  these  obvious  facts  are  to-day  recognized  to  a 
less  extent  even  than  formerly,  the  mistaken  views, 
which  we  had  occasion  to  point  out  above,^  are 
largely  responsible  for  it,  viz.,  the  view  now  upheld 
by  many  that  the  prophetic  sermons  consist  of  epi- 
grammatically  short  utterances,  and  the  contrary  view 
advanced  by  others  that  they  have,  to  a  large  extent, 
come  down  to  us  in  a  fragmentary  form. 

1  Supra,  pp.  88  and  91. 


CHAPTER  III 
JEREMIAH'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM 

The  majority  of  Jeremiah's  sermons  speak  with 
such  clearness  and  certainty  of  the  impending  judg- 
ment that  they  need  not  be  considered  in  detail.  Only 
those  sermons  and  passages  need  be  considered  which, 
at  first  glance,  might  seem  to  bear  out  the  view  that 
the  prophet's  predictions  of  doom  are  conditional. 

The  sermons  which  come  into  consideration  from 
this  point  of  view  are:  XIII,  15-27;  XIV,  1-18  (19- 
XV,  4),  XV,  5-9;  and  IV,  3-31.  Of  these  the  last- 
mentioned,  IV,  3-31,  belongs  to  the  very  oldest  of 
Jeremiah's  prophecies, — on  this  point  exegetes  are 
unanimous;  the  second,  XIV,  1-18  (19- XV,  4),  XV, 
5-9,  contains  no  clue  whatever  to  its  date.  The  first, 
XIII,  15-27,  belongs  to  the  later  period  of  Jeremiah's 
activity,  for  v.  21  presupposes  the  ascent  of  the 
Chalda^ans  to  power.  Beyond  this,  there  is  no 
possibility  of  fixing  the  date  more  exactly.  It  has 
wrongly  been  inferred  from  the  mention  of  "the 
Queen  Dowager"  in  v.  18  that  the  dirge,  w.  i8f., 
must  have  originated  in  the  time  of  Jehojachin,  as, 
owing  to  the  great  youth  of  this  king,  the  Queen 
Dowager,  no  doubt,  exercised  a  strong  influence  on 
the  affairs  of  the  state  during  his  brief  rule.  However, 
in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  queen  dowager  was  in 
any  case  a  most  important  personage,  always  ranking 
immediately  after  the  king  (much  like  the  queen- 
consort  to-day  in  Occidental  countries),  it  was  but 
179 


i8o  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

natural  that  in  his  dirge  the  prophet  should  call 
upon  her  together  with  the  King  to  mourn  over 
the  certain  destruction  of  the  nation.  Another,  but 
still  more  farfetched,  conclusion  regarding  the  time 
of  origin,  which  has  been  drawn  by  some  scholars 
from  "I  must  weep  in  secret,"  is  that  the  piece,  or  the 
part  in  question,  must  have  been  written  at  the  time 
when  Jeremiah  lived  in  hiding  from  Jehojakim — else 
"  why  did  he  have  to  weep  in  secret?  "  ^  But  both  from 
a  literary  and  a  psychological  standpoint  the  expres- 
sion admits  of  no  such  deduction.  "To  weep  in 
secret"  is  a  perfectly  natural  expression  up  to  the 
present  day;  it  may  even  be  classed  among  the  stock 
expressions  of  literature.  The  natural  impulse  of 
sorrow  is  not  to  weep  on  the  housetop  or  on  the  public 
square. 

I.  CHAP.  XIII,  15-27 

The  opening  of  the  sermon  effectively  mirrors 
Jeremiah's  frame  of  mind.  The  prophet  begins  with  a 
brief  exhortation  to  the  people  to  do  penance  while 
there  is  yet  time.  He  would  rouse  his  people  from 
their  apathy,  but  immediately  his  mind  is  crowded 
with  pictures  of  the  certain  doom  toward  which  in 
their  bhndness  they  are  hastening.  Under  the  figure 
of  a  gathering  storm  he  suggests  rather  than  describes 
the  terror  and  dismay  in  which  they  will  be  engulfed 
when  the  night  of  doom  suddenly  breaks  over  them : — 
They  will  wait  for  the  storm  to  pass  by,  hoping  for 
light,  but,  instead,   they  will  be  plunged  into  im- 

1  See  Duhm,  op.  cit.,  prefatory  remarks  to  XIII,  15-27;  Erbt 
"  Jeremia  und  seine  Zeit,"  p.  217,  and  Comill,  op.  cit.,  p.  180,  who  both 
accept  Duhm's  view. 


JEREML\H'S  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  i8i 

penetrable    darkness,    wrapped    in    the    shadow    of 
death: 

"Hear  ye,  and  give  ear,  be  not  haughty, 

for  the  Lord  speaketh! 

Give  honor  to  the  Lord,  your  God, 

before  it  groweth  dark, 

before  your  feet  stumble  against  the  mountains  of 

darkness — 
Ye  shall  hope  for  light, 

but  it  will  be  changed  ^  to  the  shadow  of  death, 
will  be  turned  to  impenetrable  darkness. 
But  if  ye  pay  no  heed, 

I  must  weep  in  secret  because  of  [your]  haughtiness, 
my  eyes  must  shed  tears,- 

for  the  flock  of  the  Lord  is  led  away  captive"  (w.  15- 
17). 

So  certain  and  so  real  is  it  all  to  him  that  he  con- 
tinues in  w.  18-19  with  a  dirge  over  the  fallen  nation. 
He  calls  upon  the  royal  house  to  mourn  over  their 
departed  glory,  their  ruined  country: 

"Speak  ^  to  the  King  and  to  the  Mistress  [of  the  land], 

sit  lowly, 
for  your  glorious  crown  has  fallen  from  your  head. 

'  Read  w^samoh  instead  of  w^samd/i.  The  subject  Ynwn,  of 
samoh  and  jasllh  is  omitted,  as  in  Job  III,  20,  VIII,  18,  el  alii.;  the 
omission  is  for  the  purpose  of  heightening  the  eCfect,  and  the  case 
belongs  properly  in  the  category  of  impersonal  construction.  The 
asyndeton  jasz///  (Kethib)  adds  to  the  vividness  of  the  description;  the 
change  to  'w^iith  by  the  Masorites  was  a  blunder. 

2  Omit  w'damo'a  lidtna' ,  the  phrase  being  a  variant  of  wlhcrad 
dim' a. 

^  Read,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX,    'iitiril  instead  of  '<"mor. 


1 82  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

The  cities  of  the  South  ^  are  shut  up,^ 
there  is  none  to  open  them.^ 
Judah  is  carried  away  captive  entirely, 
is  carried  away  captive  completely." 

Note,  how  V.  17  with  its  perfect  of  certitude,  niSbd, 
"the  flock  of  the  Lord  is  led  away  captive,"  leads  up 
skilfully  to  this  vision  of  the  downfall.  No  less  perfect 
is  the  connection  between  the  latter  and  the  apos- 
trophe with  which  in  v.  20  he  turns  to  the  country, 
bidding  her  note  how  the  enemy  is  invading  the  land, 
though  this  sudden  transition  makes  the  impression, 
at  first  glance,  of  a  break  in  the  thought: 

"Lift  up  thine  eyes  and  behold  ^  them  that  come  from 

the  North! 
What  of  the  flock  that  hath  been  entrusted  to  thee? 
What  of  thy  beautiful  flock?" 

The  verse  is  just  another  variation  of  the  prophet's 
vision  of  the  coming  doom,  and  in  its  turn  leads 
up  logically,  though  imperceptibly,  to  the  concluding 
part,  w.  21-27.  With  the  close  of  v.  20  the  prophet 
has  got  back  to  the  actual  present,  and  he  continues 
in  2  iff.  by  asking  the  nation,  the  mother  of  the  coun- 
try, what  she  will  say  then,  when  all  these  terrors 
have  come  to  pass,  when  those  whom  in  her  blindness 

1  That  is,  all  the  cities,  even  to  the  extreme  boundary  of  the  South. 

2  That  is,  are  desolate,  life  and  trafl&c  have  ceased;  cf.  Is.  XXIV,  10. 

*  potheah  is  a  case  of  potential  participle;  the  subject  'are  is  to  be 
construed  also  as  object  with  pothe^'h,  a  construction  which  occurs 
quite  frequently. 

*  Read,  as  the  Kethib  demands,  5«  'i  and  r"  'i,  and,  accordingly, 
'enajikh,  as  the  LXX  in  fact  read.  The  text-disorder  arose  through  a 
copyist's  mistake  in  thinking  this  verse  also  addressed  to  the  King  and 
the  Queen  Dowager. 


JEREMIAH'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  183 

she  has  befriended  have  become  her  masters.^  And 
when  she  asks  why  all  this  has  befallen  her,  he  adds, 
then  shall  she  know  that  it  is  because  of  her  sinfulness. 
The  hopeless  finality  of  the  prophet's  belief  is 
expressed  in  his  exclamation: 

"Can  the  Ethiopian  change  his  skin,  or  the  leopard 

his  spots? 
Verily,  then  would  ye  be  able  to  do  good 
who  are  practised  in  doing  evil"  (v.  23). 

Only  after  a  long  period  of  suffering  in  exile,  he 
declares  in  conclusion,  will  they  finally  be  cleansed 
from  their  errors  and  their  corruption: 

"I  shall  disperse  them  like  chaff 
that  is  tossed  before  the  wind  of  the  desert. 
This  is  thy  lot,  the  portion  assigned  unto  thee 
by  me,  saith  the  Lord,  because  thou  hast  forgotten  me 
and  hast  put  thy  trust  in  falsehood.  .  .  . 
Woe  unto  thee,  Jersualcm, 

thou  shalt  not  be  cleansed  for  a  long  time  yet!" 
(w.  24,  25,  27b). 

In  reviewing  XIII,  15-27  it  will  be  seen  that  they 
have  one  central  thought  and  form  a  well-connected 
whole,  and  that  there  is,  consequently,  no  basis  for 
the  view  taken  by  recent  exegetes,  that  they  are 
merely  fragments  of  three  different  sermons. 

1  In  V.  21  read,  as  Comill  (op.  cit.,  ad  loc.)  on  the  ground  of  the 
LXX  rightly  emends,  jippaq'du  instead  of  jiphqod,  and  construe 
I'rol  with  jippaq'du  'alajikh;  w^al  limmadt  'otliam  'alajikh  'alluphim 
is  parenthetical.  The  mistaken  reading  by  the  Masorites  is  to  be 
accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  the  3rd  plur.  was  written  without  the 
vowel  letter,  w. 


1 84  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

2.  CHAPS.  XIV,   I-18   (19-XV,  4),  XV,  5-9 

XIV,  19-XV,  4  are  generally  acknowledged  to  be 
out  of  place;  the  declaration  of  the  preceding  verses, 
that  the  doom  of  the  people  is  sealed,  cannot  possibly 
have  been  followed  by  a  renewed  prayer  for  help.  The 
solution  of  the  difficulty,  however,  is  not  to  be  found 
in  the  assumption  that  this  whole  passus  is  the  work 
of  a  later  author,  but  in  the  conclusion  that  XIV, 
19-XV,  2  are  another  version  of  the  prayer,  XIV,  7-9, 
and  of  God's  reply  to  it  in  vv.  10,  12,  Proof  of  this 
is  that  in  vv.  19-22  the  reference  to  the  drought  is 
even  more  pronounced  than  in  w.  7-9;  note  partic- 
ularly the  concluding  verse  22: 

"Are  there  among  the  illusions  of  the  nations  any 

that  have  power  to  cause  rain?  ^ 

Or  doth  the  Heaven  give  showers? 

Is  it  not  rather  Thou,  Yhwh,  our  God? 

In  Thee  do  we  hope,  for  Thou  effectest  all  this." 

"Do  not  disgrace  the  throne  of  thy  glory,"  of  v.  21 
furnishes  no  argument  against  Jeremiah's  authorship 
of  these  verses,  since,  as  we  shall  see  later,  the  prayer 
for  dehverance  from  their  present  distress  is  put  by 
the  prophet  in  the  mouth  of  the  people. 

XV,  3  is  a  prosaic  comment  on  verse  2.  Verse  4  is 
evidently  also  a  later  addition.  It  ascribes  the  im- 
pending judgment  to  the  wrong-doing  of  Manasseh, 
which,  we  know,  is  contrary  to  the  principle  of  indi- 
vidual responsibility  expressed  by  Jeremiah.  Through- 
out his  preaching  Jeremiah  represents  the  judgment 
as  coming,  not  because  of  the  sin  of  any  one  individual 

^  tnagsimim  is  potential  participle. 


JEREMIAH'S  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  185 

(particularly  of  an  individual  of  a  past  generation), 
but  because  of  the  general  corruption  of  his  own  age. 
Contrary  to  the  opinion  of  the  scholars  who  hold 
that  XIV,  2-XV,  9  consist  of  two  originally  separate 
pieces,  the  first  of  which,  XIV,  2-10,  treats  of  a 
drought,  and  the  second,  11-18,  XV,  5-9,  of  a  catastro- 
phe which  is  to  come  by  sword,  famine,  and  pesti- 
lence,^ an  exact  analysis  leaves  no  doubt,  to  my  mind, 
that  XIV,  2-6  .  .  .,  7-10,  12  (=  19-XV,  2),  XIV, 
13-18,  XV,  5-9  form  an  organic  whole.  It  is  most  un- 
likely that  the  drought  per  sc  would  be  the  subject  of 
Jeremiah's  sermon;  it  is  far  more  probable  that  he 
dwells  on  it  only  incidentally,  while  dealing  with  the 
real  crisis  with  which  he  is  preoccupied  in  every  one  of 
his  sermons,  that  is,  the  coming  destruction  of  the  na- 
tion. The  description  of  the  suffering  caused  through- 
out the  country  by  the  drought  (vv.  2-6)  serves  as  a 
setting  for  the  prophet's  prediction  of  doom,  and  ef- 
fectively heightens  the  gloom  and  terror  of  the  latter: 

"  Judah  moumeth,  her  gates  languish, 
they  are  bowed  to  the  ground  in  mourning; 
and  the  wail  of  Jerusalem  ascendeth. 
Her  nobles  ^  send  their  servants  for  water; 
they  come  to  the  wells,  they  find  no  water, 
they  return  with  empty  vessels, 
dejected  and  confounded  and  with  heads  covered.^ 
The  tillage  *  of  the  soil  hath  stopped, 

•  See  among  others,  Cornill,  op.  cil.,  ad  loc,  and  Rothstcin  in 
Kautzsch  ',  ad  loc. 

-  Read  'addiraha  (LXX). 

'  We  would  say  "with  faces  covered,"  as  a  sign  of  utter  consterna- 
tion. 

*  Read,  in  accordance  with   the   LXX,  lua' obltodath   instead   of 


1 86  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

for  there  hath  been  no  rain  in  the  land ; 

the  husbandmen  are  dismayed,  they  cover  their  heads. 

Even  the  hind  in  the  woods  beareth  and  forsaketh 

her  young/ 
because  there  is  no  grass; 
and  the  wild-asses  stand  on  the  bare  hills, 
they  gasp  for  air  like  jackals, 
their  eyes  are  languid,  because  there  is  no  herbage." 

The  prayer,  w.  7-9,  is  not  offered  up  by  the  prophet 
in  behalf  of  the  people,  but  is,  as  Duhm  discerned,  a 
prayer  which  the  prophet  represents  the  people  as 
addressing  in  their  present  distress  to  Yhwh.^  Proof 
of  this  is  "Yet  Thou,  O  Yhwh,  abidest  with  us,  and 
we  are  dedicated  to  Thee  "  ^  of  the  concluding  v.  9. 
Such  a  declaration  could  not  possibly  have  been  made 
by  Jeremiah  as  expressing  his  own  view  of  the  situa- 
tion, for  it  would  be  in  contradiction  to  his  whole 
preaching.  Put  in  the  mouth  of  the  people,  however, 
it  cannot  excite  surprise,  for  the  prophet  well  knew 
that,  in  spite  of  his  protestations,  the  people  believed 
firmly  that  Yhwh  was  present  with  them  and  that  they 
were  truly  serving  Him.  This  view  of  the  prayer  is 
corroborated,  in  my  opinion,  by  Micah  III,  9-1 1, 
where  precisely  this  point  is  emphasized: 

ba'^bhilr.  The  mistake  of  the  Masoretic  text  was  caused  in  the  first 
place  by  W'^iAo^a/A  being  written  abbreviated:  'T13J?1. 

1  An  interesting  construction!  The  emphatic  infinitive  ^azohh  has 
for  its  object  the  implied  object  of  jal'dd;  this  construction  occurs 
frequently,  cf.  e.  g.,  Hos.  V,  14,  '^ni  'ani  aetroph  w^'elehh  aessa 
we' en  massil,  "I  shall  make  [them]  my  prey,  and  I  shall  carry  off 
[the  prey],  and  none  will  be  able  to  rescue  [it]";  Ps.  XV,  4,  7iisba 
l^hara  weld  jatnlr,  "Though  he  pledges  himself  to  his  own  loss,  he 
does  not  break  his  pledge." 

^  See  op.  cit.,adloc. 

'  See  supra,  p.  99,  n.  i. 


JEREMIAH'S  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  1S7 

"Hear  this,  yc  heads  of  the  house  of  Jacob, 

and  ye  rulers  of  the  house  of  Israel, 

that  abhor  justice  and  pervert  right, 

that  built  up  Zion  by  blood  and  Jerusalem  by  iniquity; 

.  .  .  yet  they  profess  to  rely  upon  Ynwn, 

saying,  verily,  Yhwh  abideth  with   us  (/r'/J  jalnucB 

Ifqirbcnfi), 
no  evil  can  come  upon  us." 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Micah  here,  in  showing 
the  irony  of  the  people's  believing  in  spite  of  their 
corruptness  that  tlieir  lives  are  centered  in  God,  puts 
practically  the  same  words  in  their  mouth  {tflo 
jalni'CE  h'qirhcnu)  as  Jeremiah  does  in  verse  9  of  the 
prayer  (uf'alla  blfqirbcnii  jaJnvcc). 

Additional  support  for  this  view  of  the  prayer  is 
furnished  by  XII,  4:  "How  long  shall  the  country 
mourn,  and  the  herbage  wither  all  over  the  land; 
because  of  the  wickedness  of  her  inhabitants  {mcra'ath 
jos'bJie  bhd)  beasts  and  birds  are  perishing,"  etc.  This 
verse,  as  stated  above,^  must  at  one  time  have  formed 
a  part  of  the  description  of  the  drought  with  which  the 
prophet  opens  this  sermon.  The  indications  are  that 
its  original  position  was  between  the  present  v.  6  and 
V.  7.  In  the  first  place,  there  seems  to  be  a  trace  of  it 
left  in  the  otto  \aov  aBiKiwi^  read  by  the  LXX 
AQ  at  the  end  of  v.  6,  and  corresponding,  though  with 
a  slight  variant,  to  mcra'alh  jos'^bhc  bhd  of  XII,  4. 
Further,  it  will  be  noticed  at  a  glance  how  perfectly 
the  verse  fits  in  after  vv.  2-6.  The  question,  "How 
long  shall  the  country  mourn,  and  the  herbage  wither 
all  over  the  land?"  with  which  the  verse  opens,  is 
clearly  a  condensation  of  the  two  subparts  of  w.  2-6, 

'  Sec  supra,  p.  iisf. 


1 88  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

viz.,  2-4  and  5-6.  These  have  just  described  minutely 
the  gloom  and  the  drought  prevaihng  throughout  the 
land;  XII,  4a  asks,  substantially,  how  long  this  state 
of  affairs  shall  last.  As  to  XII,  4b,  "because  of  the 
wickedness  of  her  inhabitants  beasts  and  birds  are 
perishing,"  this  explanation  of  the  cause  of  the  drought 
is  what  we  should  expect  after  the  detailed  description 
of  its  horrors.  It  is  the  pointing  of  the  moral.  In  fact, 
the  absence  of  such  a  reflection  would  be  an  exception 
to  what  may  be  considered  the  customary  line  of 
thought  in  such  cases  in  prophetic  literature.  Finally, 
when  XII,  4  is  inserted  here,  its  last  part,  ki  'anfril 
lojir'ce  'aeih  ^aJfrithenu,  if  emended  in  accordance  with 
the  LXX,  becomes  at  once  clear  and  related.  The 
LXX  read  after  Id  jir'cE:  jahwcB  for  the  subject,  and  in- 
stead of  ^ajfrithenu  they  read  'orhotJienu: — ki  'am'ru 
Idjir'cBJahwcB  'aeth  'orhothenu.  ki  (for  which  the  LXX 
A  has  Kai)  is  introductory  ki,  which  is  frequently  used 
in  passing  over  to  a  new  thought,  as  here,  where  the 
prophet  turns  from  the  description  of  the  drought  and 
his  explanation  of  it  to  the  people's  reflections  about  it 
and  their  prayer  to  Yhwh.  'orhoth  is  used  here  in  the 
same  sense  as  Prov.  I,  19,  Job  VIII,  13,  "lot,"  "con- 
dition," "plight":  "They  speak  Yhwh  heedeth  not 
our  plight."  This  comment  on  the  part  of  the  people 
not  only  accords  with,  but  also  prepares  us  for,  the 
note  struck  in  the  second  part  of  the  prayer: 

"0,  Hope  of  Israel,  its  Savior  in  the  time  of  trouble, 
why  dost  Thou  act  like  a  stranger  in  the  land, 
like  a  wayfarer  that  tarrieth  over  night? 
Why  dost  Thou  act  like  one  that  is  dazed, 
like  a  hero  that  is  powerless?"  (vv.  8,  9a). 

If,  as  from  all  these  facts  it  seems  safe  to  conclude, 


JEREAriAH'S  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  189 

XII,  4  originally  preceded  the  prayer,  XIV,  7-9, 
there  can  be  no  question  as  to  who  oilers  the  prayer, 
since  'am'ru,  "they  speak,"  of  XII,  4  expressly  states 
that  it  is  the  people. 

In  regard  to  the  prayer,  w.  19-22,  of  the  parallel 
text,  it  is  equally  apparent  that  the  people  are  rep- 
resented as  praying.  For  only  in  this  case  would  the 
words,  "do  not  disgrace  the  throne  of  thy  glory,"  of 
V.  21  be  quite  logical  and  natural.  The  people,  indeed, 
beUeved  Yhwti's  honor  to  be  imperilled  by  their 
plight.  But  not  so  Jeremiah;  for  him  their  distress 
in  no  wise  reflected  on  Yhw'h's  honor — rather  would 
their  downfall,  he  believed,  be  the  manifestation  of 
Yhwh's  glory.  No  proof  to  the  contrary  follows 
from  the  term,  hab/ile,  "illusions,"  said  of  the  gods 
of  the  nations  in  the  concluding  verse  of  this  prayer, 
supposed  to  be  offered  up  by  the  people;  ^  an  anachro- 
nism such  as  this  ishableto  occur  in  almost  any  author. 

In  vv.  10,  12  the  prophet  gives  God's  answer  to  the 
people's  prayer:  The  sinful  Hfe  in  which  they  indulge 
without  restraint  leaves  Him  no  other  course  than  to 
execute  judgment.  Their  fasting,  their  prayers  and 
sacrifices  will  not  avail  with  Him;  He  will  bring  about 
the  dowTifall  of  the  nation.  He  declares,  by  war  and 
its  concomitant  evils,  famine  and  pestilence. 

Verse  11  is  the  work  of  an  interpolater,  who  thought 
the  prayer  was  voiced  by  Jeremiah  himself.  Verse  1 2b , 
however,  "but  I  will  consume  them  by  the  sword,  by 
famine,  and  by  pestilence,"  was  originally  followed  by 
haqdisem  I'jom  Ji^rcgd,  XII,  3c,  which  Uke  XII,  4,  as 

'  The  term,  "illusions,"  with  reference  to  the  gods  of  the  nations  is 
altogether  congruous  not  only  with  Jeremiah's  religious  views  in 
general,  but  with  his  express  statement  in  II,  11  that  "they  are  not 
gods";  cf.  also  XVT,  19. 


I90  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

stated  above/  got  in  its  present  place  by  mistake. 
Having  Just  declared  that  He  will  destroy  the  nation, 
God  bids  the  prophet  "consecrate  them  for  the  day  of 
slaughter."  Direct  proof  of  this  is  the  command  in  the 
parallel  text,  XV,  i,  2: 

"Cast  [them]  -  out  of  my  sight  and  let  them  go," 
followed  up  by: 

"And  if  they  ask  you  whither  shall  we  go, 

tell  them,  thus  saith  the  Lord, 

such  as  are  destined  for  Death  to  Death, 

such  as  are  destined  for  the  sword  to  the  sword, 

such  as  are  destined  for  famine  to  famine, 

such  as  are  destined  for  captivity  to  captivity." 

In  fact  this  latter  passage  furnishes  the  clue  to  the 
interpretation  and  proper  context  of  XII,  3c. 

As  in  IV,  10,  V,  12-14,  and  31,  Jeremiah  continues 
in  XIV,  i3-i7a  that  the  naive  assurance  of  the  people 
and  their  prophets  that  his  prediction  of  doom  will 
not  be  proved  true  is  a  most  pitiful  delusion.  In 
accordance  with  the  form  which  suggested  itself  most 
naturally  for  the  preceding  part,  XII,  4c,  XIV,  7-10, 
12,  XII,  3c,  the  prophet  continues  this  part,  too, 
in  the  form  of  a  dialogue  between  himself  and  God. 
This  uniformity  of  structure  contributes  materially 
to  the  proof  that  XIV,  2-6,  XII,  4,  XIV,  7-10,  12, 
XII,  3c,  and  XIV,  i3-i7a  are  all  pivoted  in  one  centre 
and  are  consecutive  parts  of  one  sermon. 

The  reiterated  declaration  that  their  doom  is  sealed 
(vv.  1 5-1 7a)  is  effectively  followed  up  by  a  dirge: 

^  See  supra,  pp.  ii6f. 

2  The  prepositional  phrase,  'ael  ha' am  hazzcB,  of  the  preceding  sen- 
tence is  to  be  construed  as  direct  object  with  sallah;  the  omission  of 
the  object  adds  to  the  vividness  of  the  command. 


JEREMIAH'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  lor 

"My  eyes  shed  tears  night  and  day,  unceasingly, 
for  the  virgin  daughter  of  my  people  has  sulTered 
a  crushing  calamity,  a  fatal  blow. 
If  I  go  into  the  fields,  behold,  those  slain  by  the  sword; 
if  I  enter  tlie  city,  behold,  those  famished  from  hun- 
ger— Yea,  even  prophet  and  priest  are  bowed 
in  mourning  to  the  ground,  void  of  knowledge  "  ^ 
(vv.  i7b-i8). 

Note  how  the  close  of  the  dirge,  with  its  picture  of  the 
despair  and  consternation  with  which  priest  and 
prophet  will  be  seized  on  the  day  of  doom,  forms  an 
eflectivc  contrast  to  vv.  i3-i7a,  which  dwell  upon  the 
mistaken  feeling  of  security  in  which  they  indulge  at 
present. 

XV,  5-9  are  the  sequel  of  the  dirge,  XIV,  lyb-iS; 
verse  5  forms  a  sort  of  connecting  hnk  between  the 
two,  inasmuch  as  it  continues  in  the  same  strain  as  the 
dirge.  These  verses  bear  much  the  same  relation  to  the 
dirge  as  XIII,  20-27  do  to  the  preceding  dirge,  vv.  18- 
19.  Like  XIII,  20-27,  they  combine  with  the  picture 
of  the  coming  destruction  an  explanation  of  the  cause 
of  it: 

"-  WTio  will  have  compassion  with  thee,  O  Jerusalem? 

Who  will  extend  sympathy  unto  thee? 

And  who  will  turn  aside  to  inquire  about  thy  welfare? 

Thou  hast  rejected  me  saith  the  Lord; 

thou  art  given  up  to  backsliding; 

*  Read,  as  stated  above  (p.  113),  fa//<Tw  for  iah'ril  and  omit  u<  of 
wflo.  The  mistake  iah'rii  is  to  be  explained  by  the  fact  that,  owing  to 
the  interchange  of  D  and  b  in  Armaic,  ^"irit^  was  misread  ^TPlf  and 
subsequently  written  ^"iriD.  Id  jada'  u  is  circumstantial  clause;  for  the 
idea  conveyed  by  "void  of  knowledge"  sec  supra,  pp.  i  i^i. 

*  Omit  ki,  in  accordance  with  the  reading  of  the  LXX. 


192  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

hence  I  will  stretch  out  my  hand  and  destroy  thee, 

I  weary  of  showing  compassion. 

I  will  winnow  them  with  the  fork  in  the  gates  of  the 

land,i 
I  will  bereave,  will  annihilate  ^  my  people, 
since  they  turn  not  from  their  ways; 
their  widows  shall  be  more  numerous  ^  than  the  sand 

of  the  sea. 
I  will  cause  the  destroyer  to  descend  ^ 
upon  the  capital — upon  the  picked  army — at  midday; 
I  will  cause  fear  and  terror  to  befall  her  suddenly  " 

(vv.  5-8). 

The  customary  translation  of  'a/  ^em  bahur,  "upon 
the  mother  of  the  young  army-corps,"  v.  8b  (in 
Kautzsch  ^  'em  is  rendered  "the  mothers"),  is  wrong; 
there  is,  however,  no  need  for  Duhm's  emendation  of 
bahur  to  waul.  I  find  the  clue  to  the  phrase  in  the 
rendering  of  it  by  the  LXX:  fjLrjrepa  veaviaKov^,  which 
shows  that  they  took  bahur  not  as  genitive  but  as 
coordinate  with  'em — a  syntactical  relation  which  is 
indicated  also  by  the  accents.  This  suggests  that  'efn 
has  here  the  same  meaning  which  it  has  in  the  hen- 
diadys,  Hr  w^'em  {bejisra'el),  II  Sam.  XX,  19,^  and  also 
on  Phoenician  coins,^  viz.,  "metropolis,"  with  which 

1  "In  the  gates  of  the  land,"  that  is,  where  they  will  be  conquered 
by  the  enemy. 

2  The  perfects  in  the  declaration,  vv.  yS.,  belong  in  the  category  of 
the  prophetic  perfect. 

^  It  may  be  explained  as  dativus  ethiciis;  the  LXX,  however,  did  not 
read  it. 

^  Omit,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX,  lahaem. 

^  This  is  also  Rashi's  interpretation  of  'em;  Rashi,  however,  leaves 
bahur  entirely  unexplained. 

^  See  Lidzbarski,  "  Nordsemitische  Epigraphik,"  Wortschatz,  s.  v. 


JERExMIAH'S  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  193 

meaning  also  Syr.  'emd  and  Arab,  'iimmun  are 
found;  cf.  nincive  'ema  daihilr,  "Niniveh,  the  Metrop- 
olis of  Assyria,"  ^  'uvwiu-lkurd  and  'ummun  alone  = 
"Mecca,"  or  any  other  "principal  city,"  in  explana- 
tion of  which  it  is  correctly  remarked  in  al-Kamus, 
"every  city  is  the  'ummun  of  the  towns  around  it;  "  - 
cf.  further  'ummahdiu-lbilddi,  "the  principal  cities  of 
the  country." 

The  reference  in  our  verse  is  clearly  to  the  capital, 
Jerusalem,  which  fully  accords  with  the  opening  verses 
of  the  passus,  where  Jerusalem  is  directly  addressed. 
The  collective  hahilr  is  a  miHtary  term,  just  as  in 
II  Sam.  VI,  I,  I  KJ.  XII,  21, 1  Chron,  XIX,  10,  ct  aliL, 
meaning  "  the  elite  of  the  army."  Note  the  force  of  the 
asyndeton,  'em  baJmr,  how  it  adds  to  the  vividness 
of  the  description — the  conquest  of  the  capital  is 
nothing  more  nor  less  than  the  defeat  of  the  garrison 
defending  it.  In  view  of  the  asyndeton,  'em  baJmr,  the 
''aldha  of  the  following  part  of  the  verse  referring  only 
to  'em  is  perfectly  consistent. 

The  meaning  of  'em  hahur  throws  hght  also  on  the 
concluding  verse  9a: 

"She  that  hath  given  birth  to  seven 

fadeth  away,  she  breatheth  out  her  life, 

her  sun  setteth  •''  in  broad  daylight/ 

[and]  she  is  thrown  into  dismay  and  confusion." 

"She  that  hath  given  birth  to  seven" — i.  e.,  one  that 
is  in  the  highest  degree  prolific — is  not  to  be  under- 
stood as  meaning  Uterally  a  mother  with  many  chil- 

'  Quoted  in  Payne  Smith,  "Thesaurus  Syriacus,"  s.  v.   ^cmd. 

*  Quoted  in  Lane,  "  Arabic-English  Lexicon,"  s.  v.  'ummun. 

*  Read,  in  accordance  with  the  Kcthib,  ba'd. 

*  That  is,  unexpectedly. 


194  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

dren,  but  is  figurative  for  the  populous  city.^  The 
verse  describes  the  fall  of  the  capital,  and  the  personifi- 
cation employed  was  suggested  naturally  by  the  refer- 
ence to  it  as  "mother"  in  the  preceding  verse;  cf.  the 
similar  personification  in  IV,  31  in  the  description  of 
the  death-agony  of  the  nation.^  With  this  verse  the 
prophet  falls  back,  in  conclusion,  into  the  strain  of  the 
dirge,  v.  8b  forming  a  logical  transition.  This  close  ^ 
is  but  another  illustration  of  the  skill  and  harmony 
with  which  XV,  5-9  and  the  preceding  dirge,  XIV, 
lyb-iS,  are  merged  into  one  another.  Note  also  that 
the  circumstantial  sentence,  bosd  w'hapherd,  "and  she 
is  thrown  into  dismay  and  confusion,"  which  speaks 
of  the  effect  of  the  fall  of  the  capital  upon  the  people, 
forms  the  counterpart  of  "Yea,  even  prophet  and 
priest  are  bowed  in  mourning  to  the  ground,  void  of 
knowledge"  of  the  dirge. 

Far  from  permitting  the  inference,  therefore,  "that 
Jeremiah  still  hoped  to  effect  the  conversion  of  the 
people  and  so  to  ward  off  the  judgment,"  ^  the 
sermon,  XIV,   2-XV,  9,  in  reaHty  furnishes  every 

^  The  number  sevett  is  frequently  used  in  the  Bible,  as  in  fact 
throughout  ancient  literature,  to  denote  that  one  possesses  a  quality 
or  performs  a  task  to  perfection,  cf.,  e.  g.,  Prov.  IX,  i,  "Wisdom  hath 
built  her  house,  she  hath  hewn  her  pillars  sevenfold"  (sibfid),  mean- 
ing her  structure  is  perfect. 

2  See  infra,  p.  202. 

3  Verse  9b,  "And  those  that  are  left  of  them  will  I  deliver  to  the 
sword  before  their  enemies,"  cannot  have  originally  followed  ga,  being 
altogether  incongruous  with  it  {n^'mnjahn'CE,  which  was  not  read  by 
the  LXX,  was  added  later,  possibly  in  order  to  smooth  over  the 
incongruity).  The  half-verse  may  possibly  have  followed  v.  7a 
("I  shall  winnow  them  with  the  fork  in  the  gates  of  the  land"),  w^here 
it  would  fit  in  very  well. 

*  This  view  of  XIV,  2-XV,  9  is  taken  by  Rothstein  in  Kautzsch  ', 
prefatory  remarks  to  Jer.  XIV,  i-XV,  9,  and  others. 


JEREMIAH'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  195 

proof   that   the  doom  was   for   him   absolutely  cer- 
tain. 

3.  CHAP.  IV,  3-31 

The  same  holds  true,  to  an  even  greater  extent,  o-f 
IV,  3-31.^  This  sermon  is  a  masterpiece  of  poetic 
description.  For  terseness  and  vividness  of  descrip- 
tion and  for  dramatic  effect  it  has  scarcely  its  equal 
in  prophetic  Hterature,  and,  outside  of  the  Book  of 
Job.  there  is  nothing  in  the  Bible  that  can  be  compared 
with  it  for  mastery  of  style.  The  whole  is  a  skilfully 
arranged  tripartite  piece  depicting  graphically  the 
prophet's  state  of  mind — in  particular,  how  he  is  con- 
stantly beset  by  the  pictures  of  the  coming  ruin. 

Jeremiah  opens  the  sermon  by  exhorting  the  people 
to  effect  a  real  reform,  a  reform  of  their  hearts  and 
morals,  lest  certain  destruction  overtake  them: 

"2  Thus  saith  the  Lord  to  the  men  of  Judah  and 

Jerusalem, 
break  up  your  fallow  ground  and  sow  not  among 

thorns. 
Circumcise  yourselves  to  the  Lord, 
remove  the  foreskin  from  your  hearts, 
ye  men  of  Judah  and  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem, 
lest  my  wrath  come  forth  hke  fire 
and  bum  that  none  can  quench  it 
because  of  the  evil  of  your  doings"  (vv.  3, 4). 

'  That  TV,  if.  forms  the  conclusion  of  the  sermon,  III,  6ff.,  has  been 
shown  conclusively  by  Giesebrecht,  "Das  Buch  Jeremia,"  *  prefa- 
tory remarks  to  III,  6-IV,  2. 

^ki,  as  Giesebrecht,  of>.  cil.,  ad  loc,  rightly  points  out,  must  have 
been  added  later;  possiljly  the  whole  half-verse  is  rcdactorial  addi- 
tion; the  LXX;\  did  not  read  it. 


196  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

As  if  to  show  the  irony  of  such  an  admonition,  he 
leads  his  hearers  abruptly  into  the  midst  of  the 
judgment-scene,  telling  them  to  flee  unto  the  fortified 
cities  from  the  enemy  invading  the  country: 

"Announce  in  Judah  and  Jerusalem,  proclaim  and 
say, 

sound  the  trumpet  in  the  land,  call  aloud,^ 

bid  them  ^  assemble,  that  we  may  go  into  the  fortified 
cities. 

Raise  the  standard  toward  Zion,  flee,  halt  not! 

Yea,  evil  approacheth  ^  from  the  north,  a  great  de- 
struction. 

The  lion  hath  come  forth  from  the  thicket, 

the  destroyer  of  nations  is  on  his  way; 

he  hath  left  his  place  in  order  to  make  thy  land  deso- 
late, 

that  thy  cities  may  become  ruins,  uninhabited. 

Because  of  this  gird  yourselves  with  sackcloth,  mourn 
and  wail; 

for  the  fierce  anger  of  the  Lord  is  not  turned  away  from 
us"(vv.5-8). 

Verse  8  has  brought  the  prophet  back,  almost 
imperceptibly,  one  might  say,  from  his  visualization 
of  the  doom  to  the  actual  present;  so  he  continues  by 
contrasting  the  terror  and  confusion  that  will  prevail 
on  the  day  of  doom  with  the  present  bUnd  assurance  of 

^  MaVu  is  elliptical  phrase  for  maVu  plkhaem  (see  Goldziher  in 
ZDMG,  XXVIII,  310,  n.i). 

-  Omit,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX,  the  w^  of  weifnril. 

'  Instead  of  'aiiokhi  mebhl  read,  as  Duhm,  op.  cit.,  ad  loc,  rightly 
emends,  ba'd — a  reading  attested  in  fact  by  Theodoret:  iSov  KaKo. 
airo  (ioppa  epx'^rai  Kal  a-vvTpLJ3rj  fieydXr]  (see  Holmes  &  Parson,  ad 
loc). 


JEREMIAH'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  197 

tlie  people — an  assurance  the  more  pathetic,  when  one 
considers  that  the  sword  is  suspended  over  their 
heads : 

''On  that  day.  saith  the  Lord,  the  King  and  the  nobles 
shall  lose  courage, 

and  tlic  priests  shall  be  appalled  and  the  prophets  be 
confounded. 

Then  will  they  say/  Ah!  Lord  God,  verily, 

Thou  hast  grievously  beguiled  this  people  and  Jeru- 
salem - 

by  saying  ye  shall  enjoy  safety — 

whereas  the  sword  toucheth  [our]  very  Hves. 

In  that  time  it  will  be  said  about  this  people  and 
Jerusalem, 

a  scorching  wind  is  blowing  from  the  bare  hills 

of   the  desert   toward   the  daughter  of  my  people, 

not  to  fan  nor  to  winnow  "  (vv.  9-1 1). 

"Not  to  fan  nor  to  winnow"  is  the  prophet's  way  of 
saying  "to  destroy."  The  sinister  implication  of  the 
words  is  more  forcible  than  if  he  had  said  "to  de- 
stroy" outright. 

'  Read,  in  accordance  with  the  LXXA,  w^^am^ru  instead  of  wa'd- 
inar;  the  mistake  of  the  Masoretic  text  arose  from  the  fact  that  the 
3d  plur.  was  written  without  the  final  vowel-letter.  The  subject  of 
u^'am^ril  is  the  priests  and  oflacial  prophets  just  mentioned,  who  at 
present  assure  the  people,  in  the  name  of  Viiwii,  that  they  need  fear 
no  crisis.  The  ofiicial  prophets  and  priests  naturally  believe  their 
proclamations  to  be  inspired  by  Yiiwii,  which  explains  the  reproach 
which  Jeremiah  sarcastically  puts  in  their  mouth. 

2  The  seemingly  superfluous  liru'salaim,  following  after  /a'  am  hazzae, 
may  be  intentional  on  the  part  of  the  prophet,  who  no  doubt  wishes 
to  make  light  of  the  people's  belief  in  the  inviolable  sanctity  of 
Jerusalem  as  the  abode  of  '^'iiwn,  this  being  the  belief  on  which 
priests  and  prophets  base  their  reassuring  predictions. 


198  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Then  he  concludes  this  first  part  by  a  brief  reference 
to  the  cause  of  the  judgment.  As  in  vv.  9  and  10, 
God  is  represented  as  speaking: 

''A  full  blast  came  from  them  against  me, 
now  also  will  I  pronounce  judgment  against  them  " 
(v.  12). 

The  figure  which  the  prophet  uses  in  this  verse  to 
express  the  people's  unrestrained  life  of  sin  was  sug- 
gested by  the  figure  of  the  Sirocco  which  he  employed 
in  the  preceding  verses  in  describing  the  impending 
destruction. 

The  concluding  words,  "now  also  will  I  pronounce 
judgment  against  them,"  call  up  immediately  another 
vision  of  the  coming  judgment,  and  with  this  the 
second  part  begins: 

"Behold,  he  cometh  up  like  clouds, 
his  chariots  are  like  the  whirlwind, 
his  horses  are  swifter  than  eagles — 
Woe  unto  us!  we  are  undone  "  (v.  13). 

After  this  climax  the  prophet  pauses  very  effectively 
to  exhort  the  people  to  halt  in  their  downward 
course; — but  only  for  a  moment,  then  he  takes  up  anew 
his  dramatic  description  of  the  approach  of  the  enemy : 

"O  Jerusalem!  cleanse  thy  heart  from  wickedness 

that  thou  mayest  be  saved ! 

How  long  wilt   thou  harbor  within  thee  thy  evil 

thoughts? 
Hark!  a  messenger  from  Dan, 
a  bearer  of  evil  news  from  Mt.  Ephraim : 


JEREMIAH'S  VIEW  OF  TTIE  DOOM  199 

Tell  all  the  people,  'There  [they]  are!' 

Proclaim  in  Jerusalem,  the  besiegers 

have  arrived  from  a  distant  land, 

they  shout  at  the  cities  of  Judah  the  war-cr}-.' 

Like  guards  in  the  field  they  have  closed  her  in  round 

about, 
because  she  hath  been  rebellious  against  me,  saith  the 

Lord. 
Thy  ways  and  thy  doings  have  brought  this  upon  thee. 
This  is  the  fruit  of  thy  wickedness. 
Yea,  it  is  bitter,  it  toucheth  one's  heart  "  -  (vv.  14-18). 

Thus  the  second  part,  like  the  first,  closes  with  a 
brief  explanation  of  the  cause  of  the  judgment,  with 
the  difference,  however,  that  here  the  prophet  adds  an 
expression  of  his  personal  grief  over  the  situation. 
This  note  is  fully  developed  in  the  opening  verses  of 
the  last  part: 

"0  my  innermost  being!  I  writhe  in  anguish, 
my  heart  throbs  violently,  I  find  no  rest. 

'  ki  opening  verse  15,  is  introductory  ki,  as  XII,  4c  (see  supra, 
p.  18S).  Note  the  vividness  of  the  description — the  messenger  from 
Mt.  Ephraim  following  closely  on  the  heels  of  the  herald  from  Dan. 
Verse  16  states  what  news  they  convey.  This  latter  verse  is  perfect 
and,  with  the  exception  of  the  reading  birilMaim  (LXX)  or  /irwJ. 
(Pes.)  instead  of  'aljcriis.,  needs  no  emendation,  gojim  has  here  the 
meaning  "all  the  people,"  just  a.s 'ammim  Job.  XVII,  6,  and  l^'ummim 
Prov.  XXIV,  24;  the  meaning  "tell"  which  hizklr  has  here  cannot  be 
questioned,  since  the  word  occurs  in  Gen.  XL,  14  with  the  meaning 
"mention"  and  in  Is.  LXIII,  7  and  in  Ps.  LXXVII,  12  (K)  with  the 
meaning  "relate."  hinnc  forms  an  ellipsis,  the  subject  being  omitted. 
The  ellipsis  adds  greatly  to  the  vividness  of  the  scene;  grammatically 
it  is  to  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  hinne  is  primarily  verbum  sub- 
slanliviim. 

^The  sufTixof  the  2d  sm^.oi  libhekh  is  impersonal, as, e.g.,  in  io'^^/jd 
'azzd  (Jud.  VI,  4),  bd'<^kha  stir  (I  Sam.  XV,  7). 


200  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

For  my  soul  heareth  ^  but  the  sound  of  the  trumpet. 

the  alarm  of  war. 
Destruction  meeteth  destruction,^ 
Yea,  the  whole  country  is  ravaged, 
all  of  a  sudden  my  tents  are  destroyed, 
in  an  instant  my  tent-hangings  [are  destroyed]. 
How  long  must  I  behold  the  standard, 
must  I  hear  the  sound  of  the  trumpet?"  (vv.  19-21). 

In  answer  to  the  question  of  the  prophet,  how  long 
his  agony  must  last,  God  points  to  the  people's  hope- 
less corruption,  their  utter  mental  and  spiritual  blind- 
ness, whereupon  the  prophet  again  takes  up  the  thread 
of  i9b-2i,  and  develops  in  detail  his  vision  of  the 
destruction  of  the  country: 

"  For  my  people  are  fooUsh,  they  know  me  not, 
stupid  children  they  are,  lacking  understanding, 
they  are  cunning  in  doing  evil,  but  know  not  how  to  do 

good. 
I  look  to  the  earth,  and  there  is  chaos  and  void, 
to  the  sky,  and  its  luster  is  gone; 
I  behold   the  mountains  tottering  and  all  the  hills 

shaking; 
I  look  about,  and  there  are  no  people, 
even  the  birds  of  the  sky  are  scared  away; 
I  look  about,  and  the  fruitful  country  is  turned  to  a 

wilderness, 
all  its  cities  are  destroyed, 
because  of  God,  because  of  His  fierce  anger  "  (vv. 

22-26). 

^  Read  the  participle,  somaath,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX,  Pes. 
and  Targ. 

2  nigra  is  not  Nifal  of  qard,  "tell,"  but  of  qard,  byform  of  qard  with 
he. 


JEREMIAH'S  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  201 

In  vv.  27a  and  28  the  prophet  develops  the  idea 
contained  in  the  concluding  words  of  the  preceding 
V.  26,  and  accounts  at  the  same  time  for  the  dread 
pictures  of  his  vision — God's  decree  of  judgment  is 
irrevocable : 

"For  thus  saith  the  Lord, 
the  whole  land  shall  be  made  desolate;  ^ 
therefore  must  the  land  mourn,  and  even 
the  sky  above  will  be  cast  in  gloom; 
because  I  have  spoken,  and  will  not  repent, 
I  have  resolved,  and  will  not  retract." 

There  is  nothing  eschatological  about  Jeremiah's 
vision  of  the  coming  doom  in  vv.  23ff .  (Gressmann  to 
the  contrary).^  "The  sky  above  will  be  cast  in  gloom  " 
of  V.  28  and  "its  luster  is  gone"  of  v.  23  have  a  very 
simple  explanation.  It  is  a  universally  recognized 
fact  that  in  periods  of  great  grief  we  are  prone  to  pro- 
ject our  own  gloom  into  the  natural  scenes  and 
objects  surrounding  us;  it  seems  hardly  conceivable 
that  nature  should  continue  her  course  unaffected 
by  our  sorrow. 

Verses  29-31  are  the  finale.  The  prophet  returns 
very  skilfully  to  the  starting-point  of  his  whole 
description,  the  people's  flight  from  the  enemy  con- 
quering the  country: 

"At  the  sound  of  the  horsemen  and  the  archers 
the  whole  city  ^  hath  taken  to  flight, 

'  27b,  w'khald  Id  'ae^scB,  "yet  will  I  not  wreak  complete  destruc- 
tion," it  is  obvious,  is  an  interpolation.  It  purports  to  moderate  God's 
declaration  in  v.  27a,  which,  however,  it  flatly  contradicts. 

-  See  "  Der  Ursprung  dcr  israclitisch-jiidischen  Eschatologie," 
p.  147. 

'  The  capital,  no  doubt,  is  meant;  the  LXX  read  ka'arae^. 


202  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

they  retreat  to  the  woods,  climb  the  rocks, 

every  city  ^  is  deserted,  none  is  left  in  them"  (v.  29). 

He  continues  with  an  apostrophe  to  the  nation,  in 
which  he  mingles  irony  with  sadness  as  he  tells  her 
that  she  cannot  avert  her  doom  by  any  wiles: 

"But  thou,  doomed  to  ruin,^  why  dost  thou  endeavor 
to  clothe  thyself  in  scarlet,  to  deck  thyself 
with  golden  jewelry,  to  enlarge  thine  eyes  with  stib- 
ium; 
in  vain  dost  thou  make  thyself  fair, 
the  lovers  scorn  thee,  they  seek  thy  Ufe  "  (v.  30). 

"They  seek  thy  life"  leads  over  in  turn  to  a  graphic 
description  of  the  nation  in  her  death-struggle,  which 
forms  at  once  the  cHmax  and  the  conclusion  of  the 
whole : 

"Yea,  I  hear  sounds  as  of  a  woman  in  travail, 

cries  of  anguish  as  of  a  woman  giving  birth  to  her 

first-born : 
It  is  the  cry  of  the  daughter  of  Zion, 
that  gaspeth  for  breath,  that  throweth  up  her  hands:  ^ 
Woe  unto   me!   My  life  doth   succumb   unto   mur- 
derers!" (v.  31). 

This  sermon  ranks  next  to  the  confessions  in 
importance,  in  that  it  so  admirably  portrays  the  con- 

^  Read  kol  'ir  as  taken  demands  and  as  the  LXX  in  fact  read. 

2  Read  sediidd;  the  mistake  arose  from  the  fact  that  the  feminine 
was  written  abbreviated:  'TITC  sediidd  is  potential  participle  as  in 
Ps.  CXXXVII,  8,  where  the  text  has  imnecessarily  been  amended 
by  recent  exegetes. 

*  That  is,  in  her  death-agony. 


JEREMIAH'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  203 

flict  of  feelings  which  was  constantly  being  waged  in 
Jeremiah's  soul.  Jeremiah  knew  (Jiat  his  people  were 
past  hope,  he  knew  that  they  would  not  repent,  that 
they  could  not  be  saved,  and  that,  tlierefore,  as  far  as 
they  were  concerned,  his  preaching  was  in  vain.  But 
he  could  not  reconcile  his  love  for  his  people  to  the 
thought  of  their  destruction.  The  very  knowledge 
that  their  doom  was  inevitable  made  the  thought  of  it 
torture;  and  the  fact  that  he  loved  them  so  deeply 
made  it  impossible  for  him  to  get  the  thought  out  of 
his  mind.  His  people  were  rushing  blindly,  uncon- 
sciously, to  their  doom  and  he  was  powerless  to  stay 
them.  With  preternatural  keenness  his  brain  worked 
out  again  and  again  every  circumstance  and  detail  of 
his  people's  destruction.  Yet  his  heart  cried  out  for 
the  impossible,  that  God  might  suspend  His  judgment, 
that  His  people  might  yet  be  saved.  This  conflict  of 
feelings  explains  how  the  prophet  comes  to  break 
off  in  the  very  middle  of  his  vision  of  the  approaching 
catastrophe  to  exhort  his  indifferent  hearers  to  repent 
while  there  is  yet  time.  It  is  important  to  note  that 
similar  expression  is  given  to  these  conflicting  feelings 
in  Chap.  VI  (r/.  v.  8  and  also  loa  and  15a) — a  sermon 
which  in  structure  and  tenor  is  almost  the  exact 
counterpart  of  IV,  3-31,  though  in  dramatic  effect  and 
vividness  of  description  it  does  not  come  up  to  the 
level  of  the  latter.  The  circumstance  that  both 
sermons  belong  unquestionably  to  the  oldest  products 
of  Jeremiah's  activity  lends  them  a  special  signifi- 
cance for  our  purpose,  inasmuch  as  it  shows  that  from 
the  very  first  Jeremiah  believed  the  doom  inevitable.^ 

'  If  in  the  face  of  such  depth  of  feeling,  such  grief  and  gloom,  as  are 
revealed  in  Chaps.  IV,  3-31  and  VI,  Cornill  speaks  of  the  averting  of 
the  Scythian  danger  as  "schwere  Tage  fiir  den  jugendlichen  Pro- 


204  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Besides  the  above  sermons,  there  are  two  pas- 
sages that  call  for  discussion,  XXXVI,  3  and  7,  and 
XVIII,  iff. 

4.  XXXVI,  3,  7;  CHAPS.  XXV  and  xlv 
(a)  XXXVI,  3,  7 

At  first  glance  it  would  seem  to  follow  from  XXXVI, 
3  and  7  that  when,  after  the  battle  at  Karkemish, 
Jeremiah  had  Baruch  write  down  all  his  prophecies 
and  read  them  to  the  people,  he  did  it  in  the  hope  that 
a  conversion  of  the  people  might  yet  be  effected. 
On  closer  examination,  however,  this  conclusion  does 
not  appear  permissible.  The  particle,  'ulai,  does  not 
necessarily  express  what  the  writer  or  speaker  hopes 
may  occur,  or  what  he  thinks  is  likely  to  occur.  It  is 
often  used  to  state  a  purely  conjectural  case,  a  con- 
tingency which  he  knows  is  imlikely  to  occur;  ^ 
cf.  Is.  XL VII,  12,  ^Ulai  tukMl  ko'il  'illai  ta'^rosi, 
"If  perchance,"  or  better,  "If  by  any  chance  thou 
mightst   be   able    to   achieve    anything,    if    by   any 

pheten,"  die  "erste  schwere  Enttauschung,"  die  moglicherweise 
"lahmend  auf  ihn  eingewirkt  hat"  und  durch  die  "sein  Glaube  auf 
eine  harte  Probe  gestellt"  wurde  (op.  ciL,  p.  85  and  Einleitung,  p. 
XXVII),  it  but  shows  how  he  failed  to  enter  into  the  spirit  of  these 
singular  sermons.  Cornill's  reasoning  here  is  the  more  surprising  as  in 
his  excellent  exposition  on  Chap.  XLV  he  remarks  aptly  in  regard  to 
Jeremiah's  mission's  being  at  constant  strife  with  his  affection  for  his 
people:  "War  doch  sein  ganzes  prophetisches  Wirken  ein  fortgesetz- 
ter  Kampf  gegen  das  eigene  mitfiihlende  Herz,  welches  in  ihm  tobte 
und  ihm  die  Brust  zersprengen  woUte,  so  dass  er  wiinschen  konnte 
niemals  geboren  zu  sein." 

^  This  use  of  'tilai  is  even  more  in  keeping  with  its  etymology;  the 
word  is  really  a  double  conditional  particle,  this  formation  being 
intended,  no  doubt,  to  lend  greater  emphasis  to  the  conjectural  case. 


JEREMIAH'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  205 

chance  thou  mightst  scare  off  [the  catastrophe],"  '  Jcr. 
LI,  8,  '/?/(7/  Icrap/w,  "If  by  any  chance  she  might  be 
healed."  -  And  it  is  with  this  force  that  'illal  is  used  in 
Jcr.  XXXVI,  3  and  7,  as  the  contents  of  these  verses 
clearly  show:  Verse  3,  it  may  be  well  to  point  out,  does 
not  raid  j is m'^ii  ^acth  d'bJiarl  or  d'^b/iar  jaJrd>cc,  "... 
hear  my  word "  or  "  the  word  of  God,"  as  is  customary 
in  such  cases,  and  as  one  would  naturally  expect  here 
also,  but  significantly7/^w''M '(7c/// //ara  a,  "  .  .  .  hear 
the  evil,"  etc.,  this  evil  being  none  other  than  the  very 
peril  wliich  is  staring  them  in  the  face  and  which  has 
filled  them  with  such  alarm;  and  v.  7  concludes  with 
the  categorical  statement  that  God's  judgment  has 
been  decreed.  The  verses  are  to  be  translated:  "If  by 
any  chance  Judah  might  hear  all  the  evil  which  I 
purpose  to  do  unto  them  so  that  they  might  return 
from  their  evil  ways,^  and  I  might  forgive  their  in- 
iquities ^  and  their  sins.* — If  by  any  chance  their 
prayers  might  be  offered  up  unto  God  and  they  might 

*  The  customary  explanation,  that  "scare  off"  means  "scare  off  the 
demon  believed  to  be  instrumental  in  the  destruction,"  is  farfetched 
and  quite  unnecessary.  This  is  just  another  interesting  illustration  of 
the  grammatical  case  pointed  out,  pp.  51  and  182,  n.  3.  The  sub- 
ject of  the  preceding  sentence,  so'd  or  rad  of  v.  11,  is  to  be  supplied 
as  object  of  taardsi. 

'Since  Brown,  Driver,  Briggs'  "Hebrew  English  Lexicon,"  s.  v. 
'iUai,  explains  the  use  of  'ulai  in  these  two  examples  by  remarking 
"in  mockery,"  it  may  be  well  to  point  out  that  the  fact  that  the  au- 
thors use  irony  in  these  passages  does  not  in  the  least  explain  the 
function  of  'iilai  from  a  grammatical  point  of  view.  The  grammatical 
function  of  'iilai  in  the  above  cases  and  in  certain  others,  which  cannot 
be  taken  up  here,  has  its  analogy  in  certain  uses  of  Greek  dv  with  the 
optative. 

*  In  accordance  with  the  LXX,  read  middarkam  (plural)  and  omit 
'iJ. 

*  Read  the  plural  in  accordance  with  the  versions. 


2o6  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

return  from  their  evil  ways/  for  great  is  the  anger  and 
fury  which  God  has  pronounced  against  this  people." 
Thus  the  verses  express  a  most  despondent  view  of  the 
situation  rather  than  confidence  that  a  turn  for  the 
better  might  be  effected.  Even  when  the  people 
trembled  for  their  existence,  and  in  their  fear  ordained 
a  day  of  fast  and  penance  throughout  the  country, 
Jeremiah  cherished  no  hope  that  they  would  come  to 
see  the  peril  in  the  light  of  his  preaching  "and  turn 
from  their  evil  ways."  On  the  contrary,  their  zealous 
resort  to  ceremonial  piety,  whenever  danger  threat- 
ened or  disaster  befell  them,  their  blind  behef  that  they 
could  appease  God  and  induce  His  good  will  by  ritu- 
alistic observances  were  for  Jeremiah,  even  as  for  the 
other  prophets,  the  proof  that  by  nothing  short  of 
their  destruction  could  they  be  made  to  realize  the 
hollowness  and  mockery  of  their  religious  customs  and 
beliefs.^  Jer.  XXXVI,  3  and  7,  then,  although  for  the 
question  occupying  us  here  they  cannot  claim  equal 
value  with  the  sermons  and  confessions — inasmuch  as, 
being  a  part  of  a  biographic  record,  they  do  not  express 
the  prophet's  thoughts  and  feehngs  so  immediately — 
corroborate  none  the  less  what  everyone  of  his  sermons 
and  confessions  shows,  viz.,  that  at  no  period  of  his 
preaching  did  Jeremiah  expect  that  his  words  would 
produce  a  change  of  heart  in  his  contemporaries. 

(b)    chap.    XXV 

The  interpretation  just  given  of  XXXVI,  3  and  7 
receives  additional  support  from  the  direct  utterances 

1  Read  the  plural  in  accordance  with  the  versions. 

2  Besides  the  Temple-sermon  and  IV,  3f.,  cf.  particularly  Am. 
rv,  4-12,  Is.  I,  2-20,  XXIX,  1-4,  5ch5,  9-14,  Hos.  V,  6,  and  see  infra, 
Book  II,  Part  I. 


JEREMIAH'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  207 

of  Jeremiah  which  date  from  the  time  of  his  life  with 
which  that  chapter  deals,  viz.,  Chap.  XXV  and  Chap, 
XLV — utterances  the  testimony  of  which  is  the  more 
pertinent  as  they  are  immediately  connected  with 
Jeremiah's  committing  his  prophecies  to  writing. 
From  Chap.  XXV  (part  of  which  served  as  introduc- 
tion, part  as  conclusion  to  the  reading  of  his  prophe- 
cies by  Baruch,  see  supra,  pp.  46IT.)  we  know  that 
Jeremiah's  sole  object  in  having  his  prophecies  com- 
mitted to  writing  and  read  to  the  people  was  to  estab- 
lish the  fact  that  his  past  preacliing  was  vindicated  by 
the  recent  events  at  Karkemish,  and  to  make  it  clear 
that  his  prophesying  was  inspired  by  God  (see  supra, 
pp.  i72f.).  This  chapter  contains  no  hint  of  admoni- 
tion, no  suggestion  of  a  possible  escape  from  the 
judgment;  it  shows  the  prophet's  mind  altogether 
preoccupied  with  the  thought  of  the  destruction 
which  he  sees  so  swiftly  approaching  from  Babylon. 

(c)    CHAP.    XLV 

Chapter  XLV  furnishes  even  more  convincing  proof 
that  Jeremiah  had  abandoned  all  hope  for  the  nation 
before  he  committed  his  prophecies  to  writing,  and 
that,  consequently,  he  cannot  have  aimed  at  effecting 
a  conversion  of  the  people  by  this  means.  According 
to  V.  I,  the  utterance  recorded  in  this  chapter  was 
made  on  the  occasion  of  his  dictating  his  prophecies  to 
Baruch,  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehojakim's  reign;  and 
that  this  really  was  the  date  and  occasion  of  it  Cornill, 
in  his  exposition  of  the  chapter,  referred  to  above,  has 
conclusively  proved.  The  utterance  is  addressed  to 
Baruch: — Baruch,  weighed  down  by  his  grief  and 
despair  at  the  disclosure  of  Jeremiah's  prophecies, 
has  asked  if  all  hope  must  be  relinquished,  if  there  is 


2o8  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

no  prospect  of  rest,  if  there  is  nothing  to  be  looked 
forward  to  but  endless  misery  and  woe;  and  Jeremiah, 
who  well  understands  the  feehngs  of  loyalty  and  love 
which  have  prompted  Baruch's  passionate  question- 
ing, and  who,  no  doubt,  would  give  comfort  if  he 
could,  replies  that  God's  decree  of  judgment  is  un- 
alterable— He  is  to  overthrow  and  destroy  what 
His  own  hands  have  planted  and  builded,  and  the 
evil  which  He  is  to  bring  will  overtake  all.^  The  only 
hope  he  holds  out  to  Baruch  is  that  he  may  escape 
with  his  life. 

5.  xvin,  iff 

There  would  be  no  necessity  here  for  a  consideration 
of  XVIII,  iff.,  were  it  not  for  the  reason  that  this 
passus  has  frequently  been  referred  to  in  support  of 
the  view  that  the  prophets'  predictions  of  judgment 
have  not  the  value  of  absolute  declarations,  but  only 
of  conditional  ones ;  ^  as  a  matter  of  fact,  in  their  present 
context,  these  verses  point  to  the  opposite  conclusion. 
In  XVIII,  i-io  Jeremiah  simply  states  outright 
what  follows  by  inference  from  all  his  preaching,  and 
from  the  preaching  of  the  other  prophets  as  well, 
viz.,  that,  in  the  case  of  the  people's  sincerely  repent- 
ing, God's  judgment  might  at  any  time  be  stayed, 
even  as  God's  promises  would  not  ensure  immunity 
for  a  people,  should  this  people  subsequently  fall  into 
sinful  ways.  But  that  Jeremiah  entertained  no  hope 
whatever  that  the  people  might  yet  repent  is  shown  by 

^  As  in  XXV,  31,  which  originated  simultaneously  with  XLV, 
kol  hasar  connotes  "all  people;"  cf.  supra,  p.  49,  n.  i. 

-  Among  others,  by  Giesebrecht,  "Die  Berufsbegabung  der  Alttes- 
tamentlichen  Propheten,"  p.  82,  and  E.  Kautzsch,  "Biblische  Thao- 
logie  des  Alten  Testaments,"  pp.  202  and  256. 


JEREMIAH'S  \1E\V  OF  THE  DOOM  209 

the  fact  that  he  follows  up  vv.  i-io  with  tlic  emphatic 
declaration  that  they  are  hopelessly  corrupt.  And, 
granted  even  that  the  declaration,  vv.  11  and  12, 
formed  no  original  part  of  i-io,  the  latter,  even  then, 
would  not  permit  the  inference  which  Giesebrecht 
and  others  draw  from  it — in  proof  of  which  we  may 
appeal  from  Giesebrecht  to  Giesebrecht.  For  in  that 
case  the  most  Hkely  interpretation  of  vv.  i-io — as 
Giesebrecht  in  fact  acknowledges  in  his  Commentary 
by  so  interpreting  them — would  be  tliat  Jeremiah's 
chief  object  in  this  discourse  was  to  assail  the  people's 
blind  trust  in  God's  promises  of  the  past. 

It  may  be  well  to  point  out  further  that,  suggestive 
as  is  Comill's  reasoning  in  regard  to  the  insight  which 
came  to  Jeremiah  on  that  day  that  he  watched  the 
potter  at  his  work,^  it  is  quite  excluded  that,  originally, 
the  utterance  consisted  of  the  narrative  part,  vv.  1-4, 
only,  and  that  all  that  follows  is  but  the  "edifying" 
comment  of  a  later  author.  For  if  that  were  the  case, 
not  only  would  Jeremiah  be  leaving  his  hearers  or 
readers  altogether  in  the  dark  as  to  what  truth  had 
been  revealed  to  him  by  the  potter's  moulding  of 
the  clay  into  a  definite  shape — he  would  be  making 
no  intimation  that  any  truth  whatever  had  been  re- 
vealed to  liim,  beyond  the  common  and  well-known 
details  of  the  craft.  Though  it  is  possible  that  the 
continuation,  vv.  5ff.,  as  it  has  come  down  to  us, 
is  not  altogether  Jeremiah's  work,  but  was  tampered 
with  by  later  authors,  it  may  be  maintained  with 
certainty  that  at  least  vv.  5  and  6  are  authentic.  It 
is  not  at  all  likely  that  the  continuation  was  limited,  as 
Erbt  believes,-  to  these  two  verses,  as  this  would 
give  it  a  decidedly  unfinished  character,  but  it  is  im- 

'  Op.  cil.,  ad  loc.  ^  Op.  cil.,  pp.  is6fiF. 


2IO  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

possible  to  distinguish  with  any  certainty  just  what  is 
original  of  vv.  7-12  and  what  is  a  later  addition. 
This  point  is,  however,  altogether  irrelevant  for  our 
purpose,  as  the  piece  in  no  case  leaves  room  for  the 
deduction  that  the  prophets  hoped  the  doom  might 
yet  be  averted.  When  Cornill  in  his  interpretation  of 
vv.  1-4  remarks:*' If  we  now  ask  to  what  circum- 
stances and  to  what  time  verses  1-4  point,  the  answer 
can  only  be:  to  the  time  when  Jeremiah  still  thought 
the  warding  off  of  the  doom  possible,  when  he  hoped 
that  God's  grace  would  ultimately  find  ways  and 
means  to  guide  his  people  in  the  right  path  and  to 
save  it,"  ^  he  overlooks  the  fact  that  the  salient  point 
of  the  simile  is,  "And  if  the  vessel  on  which  he  was 
working  got  spoiled  in  his  hands,^  he  made  it  into 
another  one  " — that  is  to  say,  degenerate  Israel,  "the 
worthless  vessel,"  as  Hosea  called  it,^  must  give  way 
to  a  new  Israel,  to  the  future,  regenerate  Israel, 
which  is  to  rise  out  of  the  ruins  of  the  present  nation. 

^Op.  Cit.,  p.   222. 

2  b^jadail,  as  is  to  be  read  in  accordance  with  the  LXX  and  Vulg. 
instead  of  kahomaer  ¥jad  kajjoser,  which  by  an  oversight  of  a  copyist 
may  have  got  into  the  text  here  from  v.  6. 

3  Hos.  VIII,  8. 


CHAPTER   IV 
AMOS'  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM 

I.    THE    DOMINANT    NOTE    OF    AMOS*    PREACHING — THE 
CERTAINTY   OF  JUDGMENT 

In  spite  of  the  marked  difference  in  temperament 
and  individuality  which  Amos  presents  to  Jeremiah, 
in  spite  of  the  resultant  contrast  between  the  intimate 
self-analysis,  the  emotional  tenderness,  the  dramatic 
changes  of  feeling,  which  abound  in  Jeremiah's  writ- 
ings, and  the  vigorous,  uncompromising,  sternly  im- 
personal tone  which  characterizes  the  prophecies  of 
Amos,  there  is,  nevertheless,  a  fundamental  point  of 
contact  between  the  two  prophets.  Both  prophets, 
Amos  no  less  than  Jeremiah,  looked  upon  the  doom  as 
inevitable.  This  con\dction  it  was  that  produced  the 
pathetic  questionings,  the  gloomy  self-communings, 
the  ever-present  sorrow,  which  fdl  the  pages  of  Jere- 
miah; and  it  is  this  same  certainty  of  judgment 
that  gives  the  writings  of  Amos  the  austere,  relent- 
less character,  which  has  misled  many  of  his  critics 
into  thinking  him  devoid  of  human  sympathy  and  all 
the  softer  emotions.  With  this  basal  thought,  that 
the  nation  is  to  perish,  Amos  dramatically  opens  his 
utterances: 

"  Yhwh  shall  storm  ^  from  Zion  and  thunder  from 
Jerusalem, 

'The  customary  translation  ol  jil'ag,  "shall  roar,"  is  inaccurate, 
for  the  ^hid^scjahiua  ji's'ag  here  has  its  origin  not  in  the  comparison  of 

311 


212  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

and  the  pastures  of  the  shepherds  shall  mourn, 
and  the  summit  of  Karmel  shall  wither  "  (I,  2). 
This  thought  forms  the  motive,  as  it  were,  which  runs 
through  his  entire  preaching,  swelling  out  more 
strongly  in  each  successive  part,  until,  in  the  shrill 
dissonance  of  the  last  one,  it  reaches  a  climax.  At 
this  point,  the  thought  of  the  ruin  about  to  overtake 
his  people  has  gained  such  sway  over  his  mind  that, 
for  the  time  being,  it  is  a  reality  for  him,  and  he 
describes  how  he  sees  God  approaching  to  destroy 
Israel.^ 

2.  CH.\p.  V,   1-17    (reconstrued)   corroborates 

THIS   VIEW 

Those  scholars  who  hold  that  Amos'  sentence  of 
destruction  was  meant  to  be  understood  as  conditional 
only,  that  to  the  very  last  he  hoped  that  a  conversion 
of  the  people  might  be  effected,-  and  those  who  take 

Yhwh  with  a  lion,  but  in  the  popular  notion  that  saw  in  the  thunder- 
storm a  manifestation  of  Yh\\'h;  with  the  same  meaning  as  here 
jis'ag  occurs  again  Job  XXXVII,  4,  where  it  is  used  s>TionymousIy 
with  jar' e???,  just  as  here  v^'iVajitten  qolo. 

^The  Messianic  appendix,  Am.  IX,  8b-i5,  which  looks  upon  the 
downfall  not  as  prospective  nor  as  sure  to  happen,  but  as  an  actually 
existing  state  of  affairs  {cf.  vv.  11  and  i4f.),  is  not  the  work  of  Amos, 
the  great  majority  of  the  critics  agree,  but  the  product  of  later,  exilic, 
or  more  likely,  postexilic,  times.  For  a  fuller  discussion  of  the  reasons 
which  preclude  Amos'  authorship  of  this  present  close  of  his  book, 
cf.,  among  others,  G.  A.  Smith,  "The  Twelve  Prophets,"  I,  189- 
195,  Harper,  "Amos  and  Hosea,"  1953.,  Nowack,  "Die  Kleinen 
Propheten,"  1722.  and  "Die  Zukunftshoffnungen  Israels  in  der 
Assyrischen  Zeit "  (in  "Theologische  Abhandlungen "  gewidmet 
H.  J.  Holtzmann),  pp.  38ff.,  and  Marti,  "  Das  Dodekapropheton," 

pp.    224fE. 

2 See  Giesebrecht,  "Die  Berufsbegabung  der  AlttestamentHchen 
Propheten,"  p.  ?,t„  Volz,  "  Die  Vorexilische  Yahveprophetie  und  der 
Messias,"  p.  17,  E.  Kautzsch,  op.  cit.,  pp.  201  and  254. 


AMOS'  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  213 

the  view  that,  at  least  at  the  beginning  of  his  preaching, 
he  reckoned  with  such  a  possibility,^  cite  in  proof  of 
their  views  V,  4-6,  i4f.  On  closer  examination,  how- 
ever, these  passages  yield  a  very  dilTerent  conclusion. 
That  they  seem  to  support  tlie  view  that  Amos'  pre- 
diction of  judgment  was  not  "wholly  unconditional '' 
is  due  to  the  fact  tliat  the  piece,  V,  1-17,  as  is  widely 
recognized,  has  not  come  down  to  us  in  the  order  in 
which  the  verses  originally  followed  one  another. 
Their  original  order  seems  to  me  to  have  been  as 
follows:  vv.  1-6,  14-15,  12,  7,  10,  13,  II,  16-17.- 
Thus  rearranged,  V,  1-17  show  not  only  a  logical 
sequence  of  thought  throughout,  but  a  highly  effective 
unity  of  structure.  A  translation  of  the  whole,  in  the 
order  indicated,  will  bear  this  out: 

V,    I  "Hear  this  word  which  I  recite 

as  dirge  over  you,  O  House  of  Israel: 

2  Fallen  is  the  virgin  Israel — 
powerless  to  rise  again, 
prostrated  to  the  ground — 
no  one  to  lift  her  up. 

3  For  thus  saith  the  Lord  God, 

of  the  city  that  hath  been  wont  to  march  to 

battle 
a   thousand   strong,   a  hundred   shall   remain, 
and  of  that  one  which  hath  been  wont  to  march 

to  battle 
a  hundred  strong,  ten  shall  remain.^ 

'  See  Mcinhold,  op.  cit.,  pp.  43fT.;  Harper,  op.  cil.,  p.  CXX;  and 
Staerk,  op.  cit.,  p.  14. 

*  The  do.xology,  vv.  8-9,  modem  scholars  agree,  is  a  later  addition. 

•The  stylistically  objectionable  I'bhelh  jisra'el  is,  as  Guthc  and 
Sievers  rightly  point  out,  a  gloss  (see  "Amos  metrisch  erlautert," 


214  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

4  ^  Thus  saith  the  Lord  to  the  House  of  Israel, 
if  ye  sought  me  ye  would  live, 

5  and  sought  not  Beth-El  and  frequented  not 
Gilgal    and    made    not    pilgrimage    to    Beer- 

Sheba : — 
Yea,-  Gilgal  must  wander  into  exile, 
and  Beth-El  shall  perish. 

6  If  ye  sought  God  ye  would  live — 

[There  is  great  fear]  that  fire  will  burst  forth 
on  the  House  of  Joseph  and  consume  it, 
there  being  none  able  to  extinguish  it.^ 

14  Seek  good  and  not  evil  that  ye  may  live, 
and  that  the  Lord,  God  Sabaoth,  may 
be  really  "*  with  you  as  ye  beheve. 

15  Hate  evil  and  love  good 

pp.  II  and  63f.,  and  Kautzsch,^  ad  loc).  The  glossator's  object  in 
adding  the  phrase,  Guthe  thinks,  may  have  been  to  point  out  to  the 
reader  that  the  decimation  applied  to  Israel  and  not  also  to  Judah. 

1  ki  is  introductory  kl,  and  is  used  here,  as  frequently  elsewhere,  in 
passing  over  to  a  new  thought. 

2  ki  is  emphatic  ki. 

^  paenjislah  cannot  be  dependent  on  dirsiijahwcB,  since  the  latter 
is  virtually  subordinate  to  wil/jii,  but  is  to  be  classed  with  the  seem- 
ingly independent  sentences  introduced  by  paen.  The  case  belongs 
properly  in  the  category  of  elliptical  sentences,  the  governing  clause  or 
phrase,  expressing  fear,  anxiety  or  despair,  being  omitted.  Instead  of 
ka'es  read  ba'es;  the  meaning  of  jislah  ba'es  "be  kindled"  or  "be 
fanned  into  conflagration"  is  borne  out  by  Sir.  VIII,  10 — see  ^largolis 
in  "American  Journal  of  Semitic  Languages,"  XVII,  131,  and  Ges.- 
Buhl,  "  Worterbuch "  s.  v.;  but  contrary  to  the  opinion  of  these  two 
scholars,  the  phrase  is  to  be  taken  as  having  intransitive  force,  salah 
being  an  intransitive  verb.  L^bhcth'el  (for  which  the  LXX  read 
l^bheth  jisra'cl)  is  superfluous  (cf.  Is.  I,  31,  Jer.  IV,  4,  XXI,  12),  and 
betrays  itself  by  its  l^  as  a  late  gloss. 

*  ken  here  is  not  the  adverb  ken,  but  the  verbal  adjective  ken, 
forming  a  casus  ad-oerbialis;  cf.  I  Ki.  I,  37,  ken  jdmar  jahwoe,  "may 
God  prove  it  true,"  or  "verify  it,"  and  Ps.  CXXVI,  2,  ken  jitlen 


AMOS'  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  215 

and  establish  justice  in  the  court  of  justice — 
pcradventurc    God    might    show   mercy    unto 
decimated  Joseph. 

12  For  I  know  tliat  your  iniquities  are  many, 

and  your  sins  numerous, 
ye  that  oppress  the  innocent,  accept  bribes, 
and  deny  justice  to  the  poor  ^  in  the  court  of 
justice; 
7  ye  that  turn  justice  into  wormwood, 
and  drag  righteousness  to  the  ground. 

10  They  hate  him  that  stands  up  for  the  right  in 

the  law-court,- 
and  detest  him  that  speaks  uprightly. 

13  Therefore  the  prudent  keep  silent  in  such  a  time, 
for  it  is  an  evil  time. 

11  Therefore,  because  ye  trample^  upon  the  poor, 
and  levy  a  tax  of  grain  on  them, 

the  houses  which  ye  have  built 
with  quarried  stone  ye  shall  not  inhabit; 
nor  shall  ye  drink  the  wine 
of    the    pleasant    vineyards     which    ye    have 
planted. 

lidido  send,  where  ken  has  the  force  of  an  expletive,  "  truly,"  "verily  " : 
"Verily  He  giveth  his  beloved  sleep." 

•  'aebhjdjiim  is  elliptical  for  mispa(  'aebhjduim,  the  full  phrase 
occurs  Ex.  XXin,  6;  cf.  also  Deut.  XXVII,  19,  Ther.  Ill,  35,  and 
daeraekh  "^naxvimja((u  Am.  11,  6. 

^  balsa  ar  is  qualificative  of  mokhi^h,  as  correctly  taken  by  Guthe 
(in  Kautzsch')  and  by  Harper,  op.  cit. 

»  Read  DDD^3  instead  of  DDDC>i3  or  030^3,  as  some  MSS. 
read.  The  mistake  is  easily  explained:  D3DU  was  written,  in 
the  manner  of  the  .\ramaic,  with  f ;  at  some  later  time  the  correction 
D  was  made  between  the  lines,  and  when  the  MS.  was  recopied,  the 
copyist,  either  mechanically,  or  because  he  did  not  know  better, 
copied  the  B'  as  well  as  the  superlinear  correction,  D. 


2i6  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

i6  Therefore  thus  saith  the  Lord,  God  Sabaoth, 
in  all  places  there  will  be  wailing, 
and  in  all  the  streets  people  will  cry :  Woe !  Woe ! 
The  husbandmen  will  call 
the   professional   wallers^    to   mourning   and 
wailing. 
17  Even  all  vineyards  will  resound  the  wailing 
when  I  march  through  your  midst,  saith  the 
Lord. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  above  rearrangement  of 
V,  1-17  ^  has  in  common  with  Marti's  rearrangement 
of  them  ^  that  it  places  vv.  14-15  after  vv.  4-6,  but 
differs  from  it  in  that  it  does  not  take  V,  1-17  as  three 
separate  pieces  or  fragments,  viz.,  (a)  1-3;  (b)  4-6, 
14-15;  (c)  7,  10-13  (exclusive  of  v.  13),  16-17,  but 
shows  them  to  be  consecutive  parts  of  one  harmonious 
whole. 

The  piece  opens  with  a  dirge  over  the  nation  that 
God  has  destroyed — so  real  to  the  prophet  is  the 
disaster  he  foresees.  This  is  followed  up  logically  in 
V.  3  with  the  explanation  of  how  the  catastrophe  is  to 
be  brought  about:  the  nation  will  suffer  utter  defeat 
in  battle,  only  a  tenth  of  the  army  will  remain.  The 
close  of  the  piece  (vv,  16-17)  harmonizes  with  this 
beginning  in  the  picture  it  contains  of  the  universal 
mourning  which  will  prevail  throughout  the  land  on 
the  day  of  doom.* 

*  Read,  as  Sievers  and  Guthe  emend,  l^ode'e  naehi  instead  of  W 
yoi«'e  naehi. 

2 1  presented  this  rearrangement  in  my  class-lectures  on  Amos  as  far 
back  as  1902. 

*  See  op.  cit.,  pp.  iSyflf. 

*  It  would  not  be  necessary  to  mention  that  nothing  whatever  is 
implied  as  to  the  nature  of  the  threatening  catastrophe  in  ki  'ae'^bhor 


AMOS'  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  217 

In  the  intervening  verses  4-15,  as  rearranged  above, 
the  prophet  takes  up  the  transgressions  and  omissions 
which  have  made  Israel's  doom  certain,  and  his  dirge 
over  them  timely.  This  middle  part  is  composed  of 
four  subparts  of  unequal  length,  (a)  4-5,  (b)  6,  (c)  14- 
15,  (d)  12,  7,  10,  13,  II,  each  of  which  is  but  a  variation 
of  the  same  theme,  the  necessity  for  judgment,  and 
each  of  which  closes  with  another  picture  of  the  ca- 
tastrophe, which  is  described  at  length  in  the  intro- 
duction and  conclusion  of  the  whole.  In  this  way  the 
separate  subparts  are  clearly  bound  both  to  one 
another  and  to  the  introduction  and  conclusion. 

Amos  begins  this  explanation  of  the  judgment  by 
pointing  out  how  it  might  have  been  averted: — they 

Vqirb'klm  'arnar  jalrwa:,  v.  17b,  were  it  not  for  the  inferences  which 
Gressmann  and  others  draw  from  this  half-verse  (see  "Die  Schriften 
des  Alten  Testaments  in  Auswahl  iibersetzt  und  erklart,"  II,  i, 
p.  347).  The  fact  that  'iV^' abliarli  b^  'acraes  viisraim  happens  to  occur 
in  the  stor>'  of  the  slaying  of  the  first-born  of  Egypt  (see  Exod.  XII,  1 2) 
evidently  led  Gressmann  to  conclude  that  in  Am.  V,  16-17  destruction 
by  pestilence  is  presaged,  and,  accordingly,  he  takes  these  verses  as  a 
separate  utterance.  The  coincidence  is,  however,  quite  irrelevant,  as 
may  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  in  Exod.  XI,  4  God's  passing  through 
Egypt  to  slay  the  first-born  is  expressed  by  '"nijose  b'thokh  misraim, 
and  thai  jasd,  both  with  and  without  the  preposition  6*  or  any  other 
prepositional  complement  (similarly  'abhar  jakn'ce,  E.xod.  XII,  2^ 
has  no  prepositional  complement),  is  used  as  technical  term  for 
"marching  to  battle"  in  regard  to  God  as  well  as  to  man  (cf.  e.  g., 
Is.  XLII,  13,  Ps.  XLIV,  10,  and  LX,  12).  Furthermore,  the  phrases 
'abhar  b^qaeraebh  or  'abJtar  6*  a.nd  jasd  b'thokh  or  ja^d  b'  are  in  them- 
selves equivocal  as  to  the  end  in  view,  that  is  to  say,  God's  passing 
through  a  place  or  through  the  people's  midst  may  be  for  a  beneficent 
just  as  well  as  for  a  calamitous  purpose.  Proof  of  this  is  the  synony- 
mous jalnvcB  '"lohakha  milhhallckh  b^qaeracbh  tnaJftiaekha,  Deut. 
XXIII,  15,  which  is  followed  by  "  to  deliver  thee  and  to  surrender  thy 
enemies  to  thee,"  as  also  the  fact  that  the  synonymous  'ae'^lcs 
bh'girb'k/ia  occurs  in  Exod.  XXXIII,  5  with  a  threatening  intention, 
while  in  v.  3  the  opposite  intention  is  implied  in  the  phrase. 


2i8  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

should  have  sought  God,  he  represents  God  Himself  as 
declaring.  But,  since  the  people  have  been  most 
assiduous  in  visiting  the  sanctuaries  and  performing 
the  ritual,  and  have  no  conception  of  any  other  way  of 
worshipping  God,  the  startling  explanation  is  added — 
but  not  by  frequenting  the  sanctuaries,  whether  of 
the  Northern  or  of  the  Southern  kingdom.  The 
hypothetical  force  of  dirsunl  wilfju  and  of  v.  5a 
(another  protasis  to  wiJfju)  follows  directly  from  the 
declaration  with  which  he  continues: 

"Yea,  Gilgal  must  wander  into  exile,  and  Beth-El 
shall  perish." 

This  conclusion  of  the  first  subpart  predicts  the 
nation's  ruin  not  less  categorically  than  the  dirge 
of  vv.  1-3 ;  Hke  the  latter,  it  excludes  all  hope  of  their 
being  saved. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  second  subpart,  the  prophet, 
in  a  sudden  burst  of  sympathy,  makes  a  personal  ap- 
peal: "If  ye  sought  God,  ye  would  live!"  But  most 
significant  is  the  exclamation  of  despair  with  which  he 
immediately  follows  up  this  appeal.  Certainly  Amos 
could  not  have  shown  more  emphatically  that  he  did 
not  expect  his  words  to  produce  effect. 

Up  to  this  moment  Amos  has  defined  only  in  a 
negative  way  what  the  requirement,  "seek  God,"  im- 
phes:  they  should  do  away  with  their  ritual  and  cult, 
since  this  but  blinds  them  to  "what  God  doth  require 
of  man,"  as  Micah  later  puts  it;  but  now,  in  the 
third  subpart,  he  explains  positively  that  to  "seek 
God "  means  nothing  more  nor  less  than  to  "seek  good 
and  not  evil."  By  so  doing  they  might  live,  and  God 
would  be  with  them  even  as  their  lives  would  be  cen- 
tered in  Him.    Then  he  still  further  defines  his  mean- 


AMOS'  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  219 

ing:  they  must  hate  evil  and  love  good  and  establish 
justice  in  the  land — there  is  hope  for  them  in  nothing 
short  of  a  thorough-going  change.  And,  though  the 
prophet  has  grown  visibly  more  impassioned  and 
persuasive,  the  hypothetical  character  of  this  final 
appeal  is  made  not  less  plain  than  that  of  vv.  4-5  by 
the  'I'llai  introducing  15b/  and  especially  by  the  epi- 
thet I' 'crith  Joseph  at  the  end.  This  epithet  (the  cus- 
tomary interpretation  to  tlie  contrary)  has  no  Messi- 
anic or  eschatological  connotation,  like  ^''erithjd'^qobh, 
Mic.  V,  6-7,  or  r'crithjisra'el,  Jer.  XXXI,  7.  That 
the  prophet  refers  to  the  nation  as  "decimated 
Joseph"  is  quite  in  keeping  with  the  funeral  song  with 
which  he  opened  the  piece.  In  the  same  way  in  VI, 
1-6,  when  scoring  the  people  for  their  self-complacent 
trust  in  the  increased  material  prosperity  of  the 
nation,  following  Jeroboam's  victories  over  Syria, 
Amos  exclaims,  "And  they  are  unconcerned  over  the 
destruction  of  Joseph"  ('a/  saebhacr  Joseph),  just  as  if 
the  destruction  had  already  occurred. 

Having  thus  concluded  the  third  subpart,  hke  the 
preceding  ones,  with  an  allusion  to  their  certain  de- 
struction, Amos  begins  the  fourth  subpart,  in  vv.  12,  7, 
10  (introduced  by  the  causative  particle  hi),  with  a 
description  of  the  arch  depravity  which  has  made 
their  destruction  inevitable.  Such  corruption,  where 
honesty  has  no  show,  where  ev^n  the  champion  of 
right  and  justice  is  hated  and  detested,  must  be  past 
amendment.  This  thought  is  succinctly  expressed  in 
the  verse  following  v.  10,  v.  1^:  "Therefore  the  prudent 
keep  silent  in  such  a  time,  for  it  is  an  evil  time."  The 
meaning  of  this  verse  is  that  in  a  time  of  such  utter 
corruption  the  prudent  man,  that  is  the  man  of 
'  Cf.  the  remarks  on  this  particle,  supra,  pp.  204!. 


2  20  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

worldly  wisdom,  keeps  silent — not,  however,  because 
speaking  serves  to  draw  hatred  and  enmity  on  his 
head,  but  rather  because  speaking  is  futile.^  Thus 
taken,  the  argument  of  the  majority  of  recent  exegetes, 
that  the  policy  of  silence  advanced  in  this  verse  is  in 
such  contradiction  to  the  prophet's  own  practice  and 
spirit  that  the  verse  cannot  possibly  have  originated 
with  him,  does  not  hold;  Amos  makes  here  a  mere 
matter  of  fact  statement  without  passing  any  judg- 
ment whatever  on  the  moral  justification  of  keeping 
silent.^  He  concludes  this  last  subpart  by  telHng  the 
ruling  classes,  who  are  principally  responsible  for  the 
prevailing  corruption,  that  the  day  of  reckoning  is 
close  at  hand — ere  long  they  must  relinquish  their 
ill-gotten  wealth. 

The  harmony  of  structure  marking  this  piece 
throughout,  is  shown  in  the  closing  vv.  16-17,  in  the 
way  the  leading  chord  is  struck  again,  and  in  the  way 
these  verses  effectively  supplement  v.  11: — the  whole 
nation  will  be  involved  in  the  catastrophe;  guilty  and 
innocent,  oppressor  and  oppressed  alike,  will  be  caught 
in  the  whirlwind  of  destruction. 

The  above  analysis  shows  that,  contrary  to  the  pre- 
vailing view,  no  discrepancy  exists  between  V,  1-3  and 
vv.  4ff.  Neither  is  there  any  part  of  V,  1-7,  10-17 
redundant  or  discordant  with  the  general  drift  and 

^  Of  recent  exegetes,  Harper  {op.  cit.,  ad  loc.)  is  the  only  one  who 
interprets  the  verse  in  this  way. 

2  There  is  no  ground  to  maintain,  as  Volz  {op.  cit.,  p.  18),  and  No- 
wack  (in  his  Kommentar,  ad  loc.)  do,  that  this  verse  shows  the  char- 
acteristics of  a  later  period  of  literature.  The  verse  is  clearly  not  a 
Mashal.  The  thought  expressed  is  of  so  general  a  nature  that  it 
might  easily  find  expression  in  any  age,  and  the  maskil,  the  men  of 
worldly  wisdom,  were  no  doubt  as  common  in  Amos'  age  as  they  were 
at  the  time  of  the  Wisdom-Literature. 


AMOS'  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  221 

purpose  of  the  piece.  Rather  the  symmetry  of  struc- 
ture extends  even  to  the  smallest  details,  and  this 
quality,  combined  with  the  vigorous,  fervid,  intensely 
individual  style,  stamps  it,  when  viewed  from  a 
literary  standpoint,  as  a  most  finished  piece  of  work,  as 
a  literary  product  of  the  very  highest  order. 

3.    IDENTITY     OF     THE     ^\^lITTEN     WITH     THE     SPOKEN 
PROPHECIES 

Notwithstanding  the  evidence  in  Chap.  V,  1-17,  the 
view  that  Amos  looked  upon  the  doom  as  inevitable 
would  still  be  open  to  challenge,  if  it  could  be  shown 
that  the  writings  of  Amos  were  not  the  true  reproduc- 
tion of  his  oral  message,  more  particularly,  if  it  could 
be  shown  that  the  gloom  and  sternness  which  charac- 
terize them  were  the  result  of  the  ill-success  of  his 
ministry,  and  not  of  the  hopelessness  with  which  he 
started  out  on  his  mission.^  This,  however,  cannot 
be  shown.  The  remarks  above  (pp.  Syff.),  regarding 
the  relation  of  the  prophets'  writings  to  their  oral 
preaching,  apply  here — the  former  do  not  materially 
differ  from  the  latter.  The  writings  of  Amos  form  no 
exception  in  this  respect.  Indeed,  in  their  noble 
simphcity  of  style  and  structure  they  show  all  the 
characteristics  of  oral  deHvery,  and  this,  to  some 
extent,  in  a  more  marked  degree  even  than  the  writings 
of  his  successors.  As  Robertson  Smith  well  remarks, 
"The  prophecies  of  Amos  .  .  .  are  excellent  writing, 
because  the  prophet  writes  as  he  spoke,  preserving  all 
the  effects  of  pointed  oral  deUvery,  with  that  breath 
of  lyrical  fervor  which  lends  a  special  charm  to  the 

'  This  view  has  been  advanced  by  Mcinhold,  op.  cit.,  pp.  46f., 
Staerk  also,  op.  cit.,  i^l.,  inclines  to  it. 


2  22  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

highest  Hebrew  oratory."  ^  Like  the  other  prophetic 
books,  Amos'  writings,  of  course,  suffered  text- 
disturbances,  but  these  disturbances  did  not  creep  in 
until  some  later  time,  in  the  course  of  their  transmis- 
sion, and  are  not  due,  as  W.  Riedel  ^  and  Baumann  ^ 
sought  to  explain,  to  the  fact  that  Amos  merely  en- 
trusted his  prophecies  to  his  disciples  for  oral  tradi- 
tion, and  that,  when  they  were  later  collected  from 
memory  and  committed  to  writing,  fragments  only 
were  remembered,  which  the  editor  arranged  in  a 
purely  mechanical  way.  The  text-disorder  in  the 
book  of  Amos,  as  Marti  rightly  remarks,^  does  not 
exist  by  any  means  to  the  degree  that  Baumann 
believes.  Leaving  aside  a  couple  of  minor  cases  and 
the  question  of  the  original  place  of  the  narrative, 
VII,  ic»-i7, 1  find,  in  addition  to  V,  4-15,  only  one  case 
where  a  number  of  verses  are  clearly  out  of  their  origi- 
nal place,  viz.,  VIII,  4-8a.  The  place  of  these  verses 
seems  to  me  to  have  been  between  III,  8  and  9. 
The  proof  of  this,  however,  does  not  belong  here,  but 
in  the  detailed  discussion  of  the  plan  and  structure  of 
the  Book  of  Amos.^ 

4.    CHAP.  Vn,  1-9.    HISTORY  OF  AMOS'  CALL — GENERAL 
PLAN  or  HIS  PROPHECIES 

Moreover,  VII,  1-9  furnish  direct  evidence  that  it 

^  The  "Prophets  of  Israel,"  pp.  1 26f .  I  do  not  hesitate  to  quote  this 
remark  of  Robertson  Smith,  although  he  mentions  in  connection  with 
it,  in  accordance  with  his  view  of  the  prophetic  writings  in  general, 
that  Amos'  prophecies  were  "evidently  rearranged  for  publication, 
and  probably  shortened  from  their  original  spoken  form." 

2  "  Alttestamenthche  Untersuchungen,"  I,  pp.  2  iff. 

^Op.  ciL,  pp.  67f. 

*0p.  cit.,  p.  150. 

^  This  discussion  will  have  a  place  in  Vol.  II. 


AMOS'  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  223 

was  not  the  utter  lack  of  response  to  his  message  which 
matured  Amos'  con\-iction  tliat  his  people  was  doomed, 
but  that  it  was  this  conviction  Uiat,  in  tlie  first  place, 
drove  him  away  from  his  flocks  and  caused  him  to 
appear  as  prophet  at  Beth-El.  This  passage  is  ex- 
tremely important,  for  it  not  only  relates  (vv.  7-9)  the 
great  vision  which  formed  the  turning-point  in  his  life, 
but  it  portrays  very  accurately  the  state  of  mind  which 
preceded  and  led  up  to  this  crisis; — the  proi)het's 
reflections,  his  growing  fears,  the  specific  facts  which 
influenced  his  reasoning,  all  are  laid  bare  to  us  in  the 
so-called  visions  of  w.  1-6.  These,  unUke  vv.  7-9,  do 
not  represent  spiritual  experiences  of  tlie  prophet's, 
but  actual  events  in  the  external  world,  viz.,  visitations 
by  locusts  and  drought,  which  had  taken  place,  not 
only  before  Amos'  appearance  at  Beth-El,  but  even 
before  his  summons  to  prophecy.  (It  should  be 
remembered  that,  even  in  the  vision,  VIII,  if.,  the 
prophet  has  reference,  not  to  an  imaginary  experience, 
but  to  the  actual  sight  of  a  basket  of  ripe  fruit;  see 
supra,  p.  142).  The  visitations  are  identical  with 
those  enumerated  in  IV,  6-1 1,  of  which  the  prophet 
declared  that  they  were  God's  warnings  to  Israel  in 
the  past  to  return  to  Him. — But  these  warnings  had 
been  in  vain!  Too  bhnd  to  understand  the  meaning 
which  God  meant  His  visitations  to  convey,  the  people 
sought  to  appease  His  wrath  by  increased  zeal  in  their 
ceremonial  worship,  by  sacrifices  and  gifts;  and  so 
Amos'  fears  for  their  future  grew  evermore,  until  at 
last  he  found  himself  face  to  face  with  the  awful 
realization  that  their  doom  was  sealed  (VII,  1-9). 
From  that  time  on,  however  fervently  he  had  inter- 
ceded with  God  for  them  before,  he  was  unable  to 
pray  for  them,  for  he  was  absolutely  convinced  that  no 


2  24  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

intercession  could  stay  God's  judgment.  In  view  of 
this,  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  Amos  started  out  on  his 
mission  with  a  clear  vision  of  the  utter  hopelessness  of 
the  situation,  that  is,  as  far  as  the  immediate  future  of 
his  people  was  concerned. 

VII,  1-9,  it  may  be  pointed  out  in  passing,  furnish 
support  for  the  assertion  made  in  the  preceding  para- 
graph, that,  the  few  cases  of  later  text-disturbances 
excepted,  the  Book  of  Amos  is  a  true  reproduction  of 
Amos'  preaching  at  Beth-El.  These  verses  are  held  by 
some  to  have  formed  the  opening  of  Amos'  preaching,^ 
but  this  is  excluded,  inasmuch  as  they  presuppose 
IV,  4-1 1,  from  which  they  derive  their  point.  Their 
only  logical  place  is  where  they  stand  at  present,  after 
Chaps.  I-VI,  and  where  there  is  every  reason  to 
suppose  Amos  himself  placed  them.  In  these  chapters, 
which  in  themselves  form  a  logically  connected  whole, 
the  prophet  sets  forth  the  necessity  of  judgment  in 
view  of  the  people's  hopeless  corruption;  he  dwells 
particularly  on  the  fact  that  both  their  rehgious  delu- 
sions and  their  false  interpretation  of  their  material 
prosperity  preclude  the  possibility  of  a  change  for  the 
better.  This  objective  side  of  his  preaching  he  follows 
up  by  what  may  appropriately  be  considered  its 
subjective  side:  VII,  1-9;  the  vision,  VIII,  1-2,  with 
its  tripartite  sequel,  3,  9-10,  13-14;  ^  and  the  closing 
vision,  IX,  1-4.  These  in  their  turn  form  a  no  less 
marked  unity  than  Chaps.  I-VI:  VII,  1-9,  as  just 

1  See  Harper,  op.  cit.,  CVIII,  and  H.  P.  Smith,  "Old  Testament 
History,"  p.  211.  Equally  excluded  is  the  view  of  G.  A.  Smith  and 
others  that  VH,  1-9  together  with  VTH,  1-3  formed  the  sole  contents 
of  Amos'  preaching  at  Beth-El;  see  G.  A.  Smith,  op.  cit.,  pp.  loyff., 
120,  180. 

2  Verses  11-12  I  take  to  be  a  fragment  of  the  original  conclusion  of 
the  book. 


AMOS'  VIEW  or    rilK  DOOM  225 

noted,  give  the  history  of  his  call;  and  the  two  visions 
following  describe  his  state  of  mind  since  his  people's 
doom  has  been  revealed  to  him — his  complete  pre- 
occupation with  the  thought  of  the  judgment  awaiting 
them. 

5.   AMOS'  PREDICTION  OF  DOOM  APPLIES  TO  TIIE  ^VHOLE 
NATION 

The  theory  has  repeatedly  been  advanced,  both  by 
critics  who  believe  his  predictions  absolute  and  by 
such  as  consider  them  conditional,  that  Amos'  predic- 
tions of  doom  appHed  to  the  Northern  Kingdom  only; 
and  this,  if  it  were  true,  would  rob  of  a  great  part  of 
its  significance  the  conclusion  just  deduced  from  the 
analysis  of  the  Book  of  Amos,  that  the  prophet  be- 
lieved the  doom  absolutely  certain.  Mcinhold,  in 
particular,  has  urged  this  view,  advancing  as  reason 
that  Amos  hoped  that  his  home-country,  Judah, 
would  not  be  affected  at  all  by  the  catastrophe,  but 
that  the  YnwH-religion  would  there  be  continued 
without  any  disruption.^  Others,  though  they 
consider  it  unlikely,  if  not  altogether  excluded,  that 
Amos  reckoned  with  such  a  possibihty  as  this,  still 
hold  that  his  preaching  and  prediction  of  judgment 
are  concerned  altogether  with  the  Northern  Kingdom, 
and  nowhere  apply  to  the  conditions  and  fate  of 
Judah.-  In  reality,  however,  as  has  repeatedly  been 
pointed  out,^   the  Book  of  Amos   leaves   room   for 

•0/>.  cil.,  pp.  47ff. 

*  See  among  others  O.  Scescmann,  "Israel  und  Juda  bci  Amos  und 
Hosea,"  pp.  id;  Marti,  op.  cil.,  pp.  150,  isjf.,  172  and  198;  and  No- 
wack,  op.  cil.,  pp.  137,  154  and  159. 

*  Cf.  particularly  Giesebrechl's  review  of  Mcinhold,  "Sludien 
zur  Israeli tischen  Rcligionsgeschichte,"  in  Tlicologische  Lilcratur- 
tcitung,  XXIX  (1904),  6f.;  also  Smcnd,  op.  cil.,  p.  181,  n.  i,  Volz,  op. 


2  26  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

neither  of  these  views.  They  can  be  sustained  only  by 
arbitrarily  eliminating  several  passages  the  genuine- 
ness of  which  is  unassailable,  and  by  wrongly  interpret- 
ing another. 

In  the  first  place,  it  would  be  difficult  to  explain 
satisfactorily  why  Amos  should  have  believed  that 
Judah  would  be  exempt  from  judgment.  The  social 
and  religious  conditions,  on  the  ground  of  which  Amos 
predicted  judgment  at  Beth-El,  were  essentially  the 
same  in  Judah  as  in  Northern  Israel — the  same 
venal  greed  and  corruption  of  the  worldly  as  well  as  of 
the  religious  leaders,  the  same  perversion  of  justice, 
the  same  riotous  living  on  the  part  of  the  rich,  the  same 
exploitation  of  the  needy  prevailed  there  as  here,  as  the 
preaching  of  Isaiah  (two  decades  or  less  later  than  that 
of  Amos  and  simultaneous  in  part  with  that  of  Hosea) 
shows.  Above  all,  there  prevailed  in  Israel  and  Judah 
ahke  the  same  rituahstic  piety  and  the  same  delusions 
about  the  relation  existing  between  Yhwh  and  Is- 
rael, both  of  which  Amos  assailed  as  blinding  the 
people  to  what  he  considered  the  essential  truth — 
the  truth  that  Yhwti  is  the  universal  God  of  righteous- 
ness who  demands  of  all  men  obedience  to  His  eternal 
laws  of  justice  and  humanity.^    This  being  the  case,  it 

cit.,  p.  19,  Harper,  op.  cit.,  pp.  CXXXI,  n.  2,  66,  143,  and  Staerk, 
op.  cit.,  pp.  i7ff. 

1  In  view  of  the  fact  that  Amos'  and  to  a  still  greater  extent  Hosea's 
condemnation  of  the  cult  is  represented  by  various  scholars  as  if 
it  were  directed  not  so  much  against  the  cult  per  se  as  against  the 
Kanaanitish-pagan  character  of  the  same,  and  in  view  of  the  further 
fact  that  those  who  hold  this  view  reason  that  this  character  of  the 
YnWH-cult  was  particularly  in  evidence  in  the  sanctuaries  of  the 
Northern  Kingdom,  and  that  it  was  for  this  reason  that  Amos  as  well 
as  Hosea  preached  there,  it  may  be  well  to  point  out  that  the  Yhwh- 
cult  as  practised  in  the  Temple  of  Jerusalem  was  no  less  thoroughly 


AMOS'  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  227 

is  not  possible  to  reconcile  a  belief  that  Judah  would  be 
exempt  from  judgment  with  Amos'  unbending  char- 
acter and  penetrating  mind,  animated  only  by  the 
passion  for  truth  and  righteousness. 

Further,  if  Amos  had  thought  that  the  wave  of  war, 
which  he  believed  would  sweep  over  Syria  and  Pales- 
tine and  destroy  the  countries  immediately  adjoin- 
ing Judah — not  only  those  to  the  north  but  also  those 
to  the  east  and  west — if  he  had  thought  that  this 
wave  would  in  some  remarkable  way  stop  at  the 
borders  of  Judah,  it  may  reasonably  be  assumed  that 
he  would  not  have  failed  to  make  this  clear  by  some 
statement  to  that  effect. 

The  fact  of  the  matter  is,  however,  that  Amos 
significantly  opens  his  preaching  by  declaring  that  the 
result  of  Ym\TH's  manifestation  for  judgment  will 
be  the  destruction  of  the  whole  country,  from  the 
pasture-lands  in  the  extreme  south  to  the  summit  of 
Mt.  Karmel  in  the  north  (I,  2).  Amos'  authorship  of 
this  verse  cannot  be  questioned.^  The  fact  that  the 
first  part  of  the  verse,  the  sentence,  "Yhwh  shall 
storm  from  Zion  and  thunder  from  Jerusalem,"  occurs 
verbatim  in  Joel  IV,  16  is  altogether  irrelevant  for  the 
question  of  the  authorship  of  the  verse  as  a  whole; 
the  important  point  is  that  this  sentence  has  in  Amos 
just  the  opposite  application  from  that  which  it  has 
in  Joel — a  fact  which  points  to  a  conclusion  of  great 

fused  with  Kanaanitish-pagan  elements  than  the  cult  of  the  other 
sanctuaries  throughout  the  country;  not  even  the  worst  features  of 
pagan  religious  practices,  as  the  Astarte  (Ashera)  worship  and  the 
sacrificing  of  children,  were  missing  {cf.  particularly  II  Ki.  XVI,  ^t., 
and  XXIII,  6f.  and  10  of  the  report  of  the  reform  under  Josiah). 
•  The  authenticity  of  the  verse  is  denied  by  Voiz,  op.  ctt.,  pp.  igf., 
Marti,  op.  cil.,  pp.  i57f.,  Harper,  op.  cit.,  pp.  gf.,  Guthe,  op.  cil., 
p.  27,  Budde  (in  Z.\TW.,  XXX,  pp.  37f!.)  and  others. 


2  28  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

importance  for  our  understanding  of  Am.  I,  2,  and  of 
the  reoccurrence  of  the  phrase  in  Joel  IV,  16.  This 
conclusion  is  that  the  sentence  was  coined  neither  by 
Amos  nor  by  Joel,  but  that  it  is  to  be  classed  among  the 
stock-phrases  of  those  ages,  which,  like  our  stock- 
phrases  and  expressions  to-day  (not  to  talk  of  our 
proverbs),  might  be  used  by  any  number  of  authors 
independently  of  one  another.^  The  sentence  when 
first  coined  was  meant  to  voice  the  belief  in  the 
superiority  of  Zion  to  all  other  YnwH-sanctuaries. 
This  superiority  accrued  to  Zion,  not  because  in  the 
glorious  days  of  David  and  Solomon  it  had  been  the 
seat  and  centre  of  the  consolidated  kingdom,  but 
because  of  the  significance  which  the  Jebusite  strong- 
hold with  its  ancient  Kanaanitish  sanctuary  occupied 
in  the  history  of  the  conquest  of  Kanaan.  For  it  was 
not  until  David  succeeded  in  conquering  this  strong- 
hold with  the  old  Kanaanitish  sanctuary,  on  the  site 
of  which  the  Temple  of  Jerusalem  was  built  later,^ 
that  the  Israelites  gained  complete  mastery  of  the 
country,  or — expressed  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
religious  beliefs  of  the  times — that  Yhwh  proved  His 
superiority  over  the  Baalim  and  usurped  their  place, 
that  is  to  say,  became  the  Baal  or  Lord  of  the  coun- 

1  Such  stock-phrases  are  often  not  limited  to  one  nation  but  are  the 
common  possession  of  several  nations.  A  very  pertinent  illustration 
of  the  latter  case  is  the  phrase,  "his  fruit  above  and  his  roots  beneath," 
{pirjo  mitnma'al  w^sarasau  mitlahalh),  Am.  II,  9,  and  its  variant 
in  Is.  XXXVII,  31,  which,  in  the  latter  form,  occurs  in  the  Phoenician 
Tomb-Inscription  of  King  Eshmunazar  (about  600  B.  C). 

^  This  significance  of  Zion  is  clearly  reflected  in  the  legend  of  the 
foundation  of  this  sanctuary,  II  Sam.  XXIV,  I  Chron.  XXI-XXII,  i, 
as  may  be  proved  by  a  critical  analysis  of  the  records.  This  critical 
analysis,  however,  cannot  be  taken  up  here,  but  must  be  reserved  for 
separate  publication. 


AMOS'  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  229 

try.  It  was  largely  due  to  this  superiority  of  Zion  to 
all  other  sanctuaries  (converted,  all  of  them,  at  one 
time  from  Kanaanitish  into  Yiiwii-sanctuaries)  that 
under  Josiah  the  centralization  of  the  cult  was  elTected; 
for  not  only  the  other  Judasan  sanctuaries  beside 
Jerusalem,  but  also  Beth-El,  and  possibly  still  other 
sanctuaries  of  the  Northern  Kingdom,  had  retained 
their  former  sanctity  and  veneration  even  after  the 
destruction  of  Samaria,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  report 
of  Josiah's  reformation  {cf.  II  Ki.  XXIII,  15  and  also 
v.  19),  and  also  from  II  Ki.  XVII,  24-32. 

The  idea  wliich  was  associated  in  the  popular  mind 
with  the  sentence,  "  YH^\'H  shall  storm  from  Zion  and 
thunder  from  Jerusalem,"  was  that,  even  as  at  the 
time  of  the  defeat  of  the  Jebusites  (see  II  Sam.  V, 
6-10),  so,  whenever  YH^\^^  would  manifest  His 
power  from  His  sacred  stronghold,  Zion,  He  would 
deal  terror  and  destruction  to  other  nations,  but  to 
Israel  would  prove  Himself  a  defender  and  a  champion. 
It  is  precisely  with  this  application  that  the  sentence  is 
used  in  Joel  IV,  16,  where  it  is  followed  up  by  the 
declaration,  "and  heaven  and  earth  shall  tremble, 
but  to  His  people  He  shall  prove  Himself  a  refuge,  a 
protection  to  Israel."  Amos,  however,  uses  the 
sentence  with  just  the  opposite  application:  the 
result  of  Yhwii's  manifestation  from  Zion  will  be 
the  ruin  of  the  w^hole  country,  the  destruction  of  His 
own  people.  It  is  thus  obvious  that  Amos  did  not 
use  the  phrase,  "Yhwti  shall  storm  from  Zion  and 
thunder  from  Jerusalem,"  because  he  shared  the  belief 
in  the  superiority  of  Zion  or  the  belief  in  any  of  the 
other  popular  notions  associated  with  the  phrase, 
but  just  the  contrary,  that  he  used  it  for  a  well- 
calculated  effect,  to  startle  his  hearers  by  the  un- 


230  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

expected  turn  with  which  he  continues  in  the  second 
part  of  the  verse.  It  is  this  paradoxical  turn  which 
gives  the  verse  the  unmistakable  stamp  of  Amos' 
individuality,  for  Amos  has  a  way  of  seizing  upon 
current  phrases  and,  discarding  the  popular  notions 
associated  with  them,  of  investing  them  with  an  al- 
together new  and  usually  contrary  meaning.  By  this 
means  he  pointedly  contrasts  his  religious  views  with 
those  of  the  people,  as  notably  here  at  the  opening  of 
his  preaching,  and  frequently  elsewhere  in  the  course 
of  the  same  (c/.  Ill,  2,  IV,  4,^  V,  4i.,^  and  18;  also 
V,  15b  and  VII,  i4f.  may  be  cited  in  this  connection). 
The  conclusion  that  Amos'  prediction  of  judgment 
is  addressed  to  the  whole  nation  is  further  confirmed 
by  III,  I,  where  the  whole  nation  is  plainly  specified : 

"Hear  this  word  that  God  hath  pronounced  against 

you,  O  Israelites, 

against  the  whole  race  which  I  have  brought  out  from 

Egypt." 

Likewise  in  VI,  i  Amos  refers  expressly  to  "those 
who  feel  secure  in  Zion,"  and  twice  he  mentions  the 
Judaean  sanctuary,  Beer-Sheba — in  V,  5  in  connection 
with  Beth-El  and  Gilgal,  and  again  in  VIII,  14  in  con- 
nection with  Dan  and  "the  guilt  of  Samaria"  (by  the 
latter  he  probably  means  "the  Calf  of  Samaria";  cf. 
Hos.  VIII,  5f.).  To  eliminate  from  VI,  i,  as  some 
would  do,  "those  that  feel  secure  in  Zion"  would  be 
most  arbitrary,  as,  in  the  course  of  this  piece,  Amos 
expressly  declares   that   "the  great  house  and   the 

1  "Make  pilgrimage  to  Beth-El  and  sin,  to  Gilgal  and  sin  more": 
for  Amos'  contemporaries  their  pilgrimage  to  these  sanctuaries  was  an 
act  of  piety  par  excellence. 

^Cf.  supra,  p.  218. 


AMOS'  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  231 

small  house  shall  alike  be  reduced  to  fragments" 
(v.  ii)^by  "the  great  house  and  the  small  house" 
he  means  Israel  and  Judah  respectively.  This  in- 
terpretation, which  is  the  one  given  by  the  Targum 
and  Jerome,  and  which  was  generally  accepted  by 
the  older  exegetes,  is  the  only  possible  interpreta- 
tion of  hahbajith  haggadol  -dfhahhajith  haqqaton.  The 
interpretation  which  has  been  favored  by  recent 
exegetes,^  viz.,  that  "the  great  house  and  the  small 
house"  are  to  be  understood  Hterally,  as  mean- 
ing the  luxurious  houses  of  the  rich  and  the  modest 
houses  of  the  poor,  is  grammatically  untenable. 
Such  a  meaning  could  be  expressed  in  Hebrew  in  two 
ways  only — either  by  the  plural,  or,  more  commonly, 
by  the  singular  preceded  by  koU  for  the  generic  article 
(under  which  category  Jiabhajith  haggadol  ufJiabbajith 
Jiaqqaton  would  fall  if  the  interpretation  at  present  in 
vogue  were  correct)  is  used  in  Hebrew  with  class- 
names  or  names  of  species  and  materials  only,  never 
with  common  names.^  Though  not  an  exact  analogy, 
the  phrase  s'ne  bdlte  jisra'el,  "the  two  houses  of 
Israel,"  Is.  VIII,  14,  may  well  be  compared  with 
"the  great  and  the  small  house,"  used  by  Amos  to 
designate  Israel  and  Judah  respectively. 

Since  Amos'  prediction  of  judgment,  then,  is  clearly 
addressed  to  Judah  as  well  as  to  Israel,  the  special 
utterance   against  Judah,   II,   4I.,   being   altogether 

^  The  older  interpretation  has  been  retained  by  Orelli,  WcUhausen, 
Smend,  Harper,  and  Staerk. 

2  It  may  be  well  to  point  out  that  the  only  seeming  exception  where 
bajilft,  though  undefined,  occurs  with  the  article,  viz.,  habbajith  luia- 
bacth,  I  Chron.  XVII,  4,  is  clearly  a  case  of  textual  mistake,  as  may  be 
seen  from  the  fact  that  the  parallel  text,  II  Sam.  VII,  5,  reads  cor- 
rectly bajilh  I'libhli,  and  from  the  further  fact  that  the  LXX  read  the 
latter  text  also  ia  Chronicles. 


232  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

uncalled  for,  cannot  fail  to  strike  one  with  suspicion. 
Apart  from  this,  it  really  betrays  itself  as  the  work  of 
an  interpolater  by  the  fact  that,  unHke  the  charges 
against  Israel  and  the  surrounding  nations,  it  does  not 
point  out  any  one  violation  of  the  laws  of  humanity  as 
an  example  of  three  and  four — i.  e,,  a  multitude  of 
transgressions — on  account  of  which  God's  decree  of 
judgment  is  unalterable,  but  describes  Judah's  sin  in 
such  general  terms  as  "They  have  despised  the  Law  of 
Yhwh  and  have  not  observed  His  statutes,"  so 
that  the  introductory  formula,  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord, 
on  account  of  three  transgressions  of  Judah  and  on 
account  of  four  I  shall  not  revoke  it,"  is  seen  to  be 
meaningless. 

Final  proof  that  II,  4f.  originated  with  an  interpo- 
later is  furnished  by  the  fact  that,  as  in  III,  i-8,+ 
VIII,  4-8a,^  so  in  II,  6-16  Amos  does  not  address  him- 
self to  his  North -Israeli  tish  hearers  specifically,  as 
he  does,  e.  g.,  in  III,  9-IV,  3 — if  he  did  it  might  be 
argued  that  the  preceding  utterance  against  Judah 
would  have  a  raison  d'etre — but  that  throughout  the 
passus  his  words  are  meant  for  the  nation  as  a  whole. 
This  is  clear  from  vv.  9-10,  in  which  the  prophet 
continues  his  charge  against  his  own  people  by  point- 
ing out  that  what  makes  their  case  worse  even  than 
that  of  the  surrounding  nations  is  the  fact  that  they 
have  experienced  God's  providence  in  a  special  degree, 
for  not  only  did  He  conquer  Kanaan  for  them,  but 
He  delivered  them  from  the  Egyptian  bondage  and 
subsequently  led  them  in  the  wilderness  for  forty 
years.^    Since,  however,  the  whole  nation  shared  in 

^  As  stated  above,  I  take  VIII,  4-8a  to  have  originally  formed  the 
continuation  of  III,  1-8. 

^  Amos'  object  in  mentioning  the  deliverance  from  Egypt  after  the 


AMOS'  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  233 

these  acts  of  God's  favor,  it  is  obvious  that  through- 
out the  passus  II,  6-16  the  prophet  had  the  whole 
nation  in  mind,  /.  c,  Judah  as  well  as  Israel. 

For  the  same  reason  IX,  7  must  be  taken  as  ad- 
dressed to  the  whole  nation.  In  this  verse  Amos 
declares  that  the  Israelites  ("Bene-Yisra'el")  are  in 
no  wise  better  to  God  than  the  Kushites  (the  despised 
negro-race),  that  is  to  say,  the  Israelites  do  not  enjoy 
any  prerogative  before  any  other  nation;  to  be  sure, 
God  led  Israel  ("Yisra'el")  out  of  Eg}pt,  but  even 
so  did  he  lead  the  Phihstines  out  of  Kaphtor  and  the 
Aramaeans  out  of  Kir.  To  argue  that  by  "Bene- 
Yisra'el"  and  "  Yisra'el"  of  this  verse  only  Northern- 
Israel  is  understood  ^  would  be  to  maintain  that  for 
Amos  Judah  was  not  a  part  of  the  nation  at  all,  that 
it  was  not  led  out  of  Eg}pt  with  the  rest. 

On  the  ground  of  the  above  two  passages  it  may 
safely  be  concluded  that  tlie  whole  nation  is  under- 
stood by  the  phrase,  "my  people  Israel,"  in  the 
following  three  passages:  (a)  "I  shall  apply  the  plumb- 
line  -  to  my  people  Israel"  of  the  vision,  VII,  yf., 
(b)  "The  end  hath  come  for  my  people  Israel"  of  the 
following  vision,  VIII,  1-2,  and  (c)  "Go,  prophesy 
against  my  people  Israel,"  VII,  15.  "The  high-places 
of  Isaac "  and  "  the  House  of  Isaac  "  of  VII,  9  and  15, 
respectively,  do  not  contradict,  but  rather  corroborate 
this  conclusion;  for,  since  the  name  Isaac  was  asso- 
ciated particularly  with  the  Judaian  sanctuary.  Beer- 
conquest  of  Kanaan,  though  in  the  actual  order  of  events  it  preceded 
the  latter,  is  made  clear  by  his  interpretation  of  that  event  in  II,  2;  cf. 
Book  II,  Part  I,  pp.  307^ 

'This  view  is  held  by  Secscmann,  op.  cil.,  p.  13,  and  Mcinhold, 
op.  cil.,  p.  53. 

'  "Apply  the  plumb-line,"  i.  e.,  a[)ply  the  rule  or  standard  of  divine 
righteousness. 


234  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Sheba,  inasmuch  as  the  stories  of  Isaac  clustered 
about  this  shrine,  it  is  evident  that  Judah  must  be 
included  in  these  terms.  No  proof  to  the  contrary- 
follows  from  "I  shall  rise  up  against  the  house  of 
Jeroboam  with  the  sword,"  9b,  for  that  Amos  thus 
specifies  particularly  the  overthrow  of  Jeroboam,  is  to 
be  explained  in  the  same  way  as  his  fixing  upon 
Beth-El  as  the  place  for  delivering  his  message  (see 
injra) . 

From  all  these  facts  it  follows  that  the  answer  com- 
monly given  to  the  question,  to  whom  Amos'  prophe- 
cies are  addressed,  requires  to  be  modified  very 
radically.  That  Amos  addresses  his  prophecies  al- 
most wholly  to  Northern  Israel,  and  only  incidentally 
makes  reference  to  Judah  (as  at  first  glance  might 
seem  to  be  the  case)  is  not  correct;  he  addresses  him- 
self, as  a  rule,  to  Israel  and  Judah  alike,  and  only 
now  and  then  directs  his  utterances  against  his  North- 
Israehtish  hearers  specifically.  The  passages  where 
he  does  the  latter  are:  III,  9-IV,  3 ;  V,  6,  15;  VI,  6,  13; 
and  VII,  9b,  referred  to  above.^  But  as  in  VI,  1-14 
he  makes  it  clear  by  his  express  mention  of  Zion  in  v.  i 
and  of  Judah  in  v.  11  that,  notwithstanding  vv.  6  and 
13,  his  description  of  the  riotous  living  and  the  per- 
version of  justice  on  the  part  of  the  ruling  classes  and 
his  prediction  of  the  downfall  of  the  nation  because 
of  these  conditions  apply  to  Judah  as  well  as  to  Israel,^ 

^  What  has  been  remarked  above  with  regard  to  VII,  9b  applies  as 
well  to  all  the  other  especial  references  to  Northern  Israel — they  all 
find  their  explanation  in  Amos'  reason  for  delivering  his  message  in 
the  Northern  Kingdom. 

2  No  proof  to  the  contrary  can  be  deduced  from  v.  14,  since  we  are 
altogether  in  the  dark  as  to  the  identity  of  the  nahal  ha"^rabha, 
"  the  Wadi  of  the  Araba." 


AMOS'  \aEW  OF  THE  DOOM  235 

so  in  the  case  of  V,  1-17  he  makes  this  sufTiciently  plain 
by  the  mention  of  the  Judican  sanctuary,  Bcer-Sheha, 
along  with  Beth-El  and  Gilgal  of  Northern  Israel — the 
destruction  of  the  former,  it  is  important  to  note, 
he  predicts  in  VIII,  i3f.  no  less  positively  than  that 
of  the  latter  here.  And  since  V,  1-17  is  addressed  to 
Israel  and  Judah  alike,  it  is  evident  that  IV,  4-12  and 
V,  18-27  are  likewise  addressed  to  both,  for  together 
with  V,  1-17  these  pieces  form  a  whole  within  the 
whole,  Chaps.  I-VI,  the  subject-matter  of  all  three 
being  the  people's  fundamentally  wrong  valuation  of 
the  ritual  and  cult.  The  fact  that  Amos  in  these 
parts  fails  to  mention  Zion  is  altogether  irrelevant,  and 
permits  in  no  wise  the  inference  which  Mcinhold  ^  and 
others  have  drawn  from  it,  that  he  thought  more 
favorably  of  Jerusalem  and  its  Temple  than  of  the 
other  sanctuaries.  For,  as  we  have  seen,  Amos  right  in 
the  opening  of  his  preaching  assails  the  popular  belief 
in  the  superiority  of  Zion  no  less  vigorously  than  in 
IV,  4-V,  27  he  attacks  the  beUef  in  the  sanctity  of 
the  other  YmvH  sanctuaries.  The  irony  of  Amos' 
following  up  the  popular  phrase,  "Yhwii  shall  storm 
from  Zion  and  thunder  from  Jenisalem,"  with  the 
declaration  that  the  result  of  Yiiwh's  manifestation 
from  Zion  %vill  be  the  destruction  of  His  people  is  no 
less  scathing  than  is  that  of  the  vision,  IX,  iff.,  with 
which  Amos  closes  his  preaching,  and  in  which  he 
describes  how  he  sees  God  standing  on  the  altar  giv- 
ing the  order  to  destroy  the  sanctuary  and  to  bury 
beneath  the  ruins  the  multitude  assembled  for  wor- 
ship. After  the  sweeping  attack  in  I,  2,  one  can 
understand  that  Amos  did  not  consider  it  necessary 

'  0/>.  ci7.,  pp.  57flf. 


236  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

to  mention  Zion  again  in  connection  with  the  theme  of 
IV,  4-V,  27.  Similarly,  in  VIII,  i3f.  he  does  not 
mention  Gilgal  again. 

It  follows  further  from  our  discussion  that  by 
"Yisra'el,"  "Beth-Yisra'el,"  and  "Bene-Yisra-el"  in 
Amos  the  whole  nation  is  understood — a  meaning  of 
the  terms  which  agrees  with  their  common  usage  in  the 
Hexateuch  and  the  historic  literature  even  after  the 
disruption  of  the  Kingdom,  when  these  terms  came  to 
be  used  frequently  of  the  Northern  Kingdom  as  dis- 
tinguished from  Judah,  The  same  holds  true  of  the 
terms,  "Ya  akob"  and  "Beth-Ya'akob,"in  Amos:  the 
whole  nation  is  meant  by  them.  As  direct  proof  of  this 
VI,  8  may  be  referred  to,  where  the  words,  "I  loathe 
that  in  which  Jacob  takes  pride,"  etc.,  put  in  the 
mouth  of  God,  are  followed  up  in  v.  11  (the  original 
continuation  of  v.  8)  by  the  declaration  that  "the 
great  house  and  the  small  house,"  i.  c,  both  kingdoms, 
shall  be  destroyed.  Similarly  Isaiah  in  Is.  VIII,  17 
(and  again  in  II,  6)  uses  " Beth- Ya' akob"  to  designate 
the  whole  nation,  as  is  shown  by  "  the  two  houses  of  Is- 
rael "  of  V.  14.  For  this  reason  it  was  but  natural  that, 
after  the  destruction  of  Samaria,  all  these  terms  came 
to  be  used  to  designate  Judah,  since  Judah  constituted 
the  nation  from  that  time  on — cf.  Is.  I,  3,  XXXI,  6; 
Mic.  Ill,  I,  8f.  (note  v.  10);  Jer.  II,  4,  14,  26,  31. 

In  the  case  of  Hosea  the  question  of  the  usage  of 
"Yisra'el,"  and  "Beth-"  or  "Bene-Yisra'el"  is  more 
complicated;  yet  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  his 
preaching  and  predictions  are  addressed  to  Judah  as 
well  as  to  Israel.  This  is  certain  from  such  passages 
as,  "Precious  as  grapes  in  the  wilderness  I  found  Israel, 
pleasing  as  the  early  ripe  fig  of  the  fig-tree  in  its  prime 
I  beheld  your  fathers,  but  no  sooner  did  they  come  to 


AMOS'  \IK\V  OF  THE  DOOM  237 

Baal  Peor  than  they  gave  tliemselves  up  to  shameful 
practices  and  became  abominable  like  the  object  of 
their  love"  (IX,  10),  luid  "WTicn  Israel  was  young  I 
loved  him,  and  from  EgN-pt  I  called  him  as  my  son; 
the  more  I  called  ^  them,  the  more  they  strayed  away 
from  me,  they  *  sacrifice  to  the  Baalim,  they  offer  to 
images"  (XI,  if.);  and  apart  from  this,  it  follows 
inevitably  from  the  very  figure  by  which  in  the  open- 
ing of  his  preaching,  Chajis.  I-III,  Hosea  depicts 
Yhwh's  relation  to  Israel  and  Israel's  apostasy  and 
the  course  into  which  Yh\\ii  is  forced  in  consequence 
thereof,  viz.,  the  figure  of  the  mariUil  relationship: — 
for  her  infidelity,  Yhwii,  the  husband  of  mother- 
Israel,  is  to  give  up  His  faithless  spouse  and  drive  her 
from  his  house,  not  to  bring  her  back  and  betroth  her 
to  Himself  anew,  until,  through  the  discipline  of 
sorrow  and  suffering,  he  has  effected  her  moral  regen- 
eration. To  hold  that  Hosea  meant  all  this  to  apply  to 
Northern  Israel  only  would  be  to  maintain  that  for 
him  Northern  Israel  alone  was  Yhwh's  spouse,  that 
it  alone  enjoyed  the  privileges  of  His  love,  and  that 
Judah  was  in  no  sense  a  part  of  the  religious-social 
community  of  Israel. 

6.   WHY   AMOS   DELIVERED   HIS   MESSAGE   AT   BETH-EL 

WTiile.  however,  it  was  only  natural  for  Hosea 
to  choose  the  Northern  Kingdom  for  the  place  of 
his  public  preaching,  he  being  a  citizen  of  that  coun- 
tr>^  in  the  case  of  Amos  the  matter  is  quite  differ- 
ent. The  question  must  be  asked,  why  he  proceeded 
to  Beth-El  to  deliver  his  message,  since,  as  we  have 

'  Read,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX,  instead  of  qar*'u:  k*qor'i,  and 
instead  of  mipp'nihaem,  with  diflcrent  word-division:  mippanai  hem. 


238  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

seen,  it  concerned  his  home-state  no  less  than  the 
sister-country.  The  explanation  is  to  be  sought 
not  so  much  in  the  fact  that  Judah  was  at  that  time 
the  vassal  state  of  Northern  Israel  (c/.  II  Ki.  XIV, 
9-14),  or  in  the  other  fact  that  Amos  must  have 
reasoned  that,  Northern  Israel  being  the  natural 
bulwark  of  Judah,  its  conquest  would  lay  bare  the 
frontiers  of  Judah  and  thus  engulf  it  inevitably  in  the 
downfall,  as  in  the  victories  of  Jeroboam  II  over 
Syria,  and  the  sudden  influx  of  prosperity  which 
the  country  was  enjoying  in  consequence.  These 
successes,  the  prophecies  of  Amos  show,  were  the 
immediate  incentive  to  his  preaching. 

Syria,  which  for  a  century  or  longer  had  been  the 
powerful  foe  of  Israel,  had  during  the  reign  of  Je- 
hoachaz  reduced  the  country  to  the  direst  extremity 
(see  II  Ki.  XIII,  7,  also  XII,  19).  An  idea  of  the 
people's  anxiety  over  their  situation  may  be  obtained 
from  the  story,  II  Ki.  XIII,  14-19,  which  relates  how 
Joash  implored  the  blessing  of  the  dying  EHsha  for 
the  success  of  their  arms  against  Syria.  In  contrast 
to  the  view  which  Amos  took  later  of  Jeroboam's 
victories,  it  is  interesting  to  note  from  this  story  how 
exercised  Elisha  was  at  his  people's  danger,  and  how 
his  dying  concern  was  that  Yhwh's  cause  should 
prove  victorious,  that  is,  that  Joash  should  triumph 
over  Syria.  For  him  the  two  things  were  identical, 
as  they  were  for  Amos'  contemporaries.  No  wonder 
that  the  latter  saw  in  Jeroboam.'s  \'ictories  the  un- 
mistakable sign  of  Yhwh's  favor,  and  that  their 
feeling  of  security  and  blind  trust  grew  beyond  mea- 
sure; never,  they  were  convinced,  had  Yhwh  been 
more  visibly  on  the  side  of  His  people.  This  is  the 
light  in  which  these  victories  are  presented  in  the 


MIOS'  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  239 

contemporary  record,  II  Ki.  XIV,  25-27/  and  in 
''The  Blessing  of  Moses,"  Deut.  XXXIII,  which 
probably  dates  also  from  the  same  time.  The  ruling 
classes  of  Samaria,  in  particular,  were  convinced  that 
in  Jeroboam's  reconquest  of  Lo-dabar  and  Karnaim 
the  kingdom  had  given  evidence  of  its  strength  and 
virility  (c/.  Am.  VI,  13  -),  so  that  without  any  fear  or 
concern  about  the  future  they  gave  themselves  up  to 
the  enjoyment  of  their  successes  and  to  a  life  of  ease 
and  luxury.  It  was  as  a  protest  against  this  blind  ma- 
terialism of  the  people  and  against  the  false  confidence 
with  which  Jeroboam's  military  successes  had  inflated 
them  that  Amos  thundered  forth  his  verdict  of  doom ; — 
his  preaching  may  be  said  to  have  been  the  first  enun- 
ciation of  that  governing  principle  emphasized  by 
every  one  of  the  prophets,  that  not  by  military  prowess 
and  material  prosperity,  but  by  virtue  of  righteousness 
alone  can  nations  as  well  as  individuals  endure. 

This  explains  why  Amos  went  to  the  Northern 
Kingdom  to  dehver  his  message,  and  it  accounts  also 
for  his  repeated  specific  references  to  the  House  of 
Josef)h  and  to  its  newly  won  prosperity.  For  him  this 
flourishing  kingdom,  seemingly  at  the  height  of  its 
power,  even  as  in  the  days  of  the  nation's  pristine 
glory  under  David  and  Solomon,  was  in  reality  a 
iJi'^erith  Joseph,  "a  decimated  Joseph,"  or,  as  he  calls 
it  again,  a  Sh^'blf'r  Joseph,  a  ''Joseph  hastening  to 
inevitable  destruction." 

•  A  critical  examination  shows  that  II  Ki.  XIV,  25-27  did  not 
originate  with  the  Dcutcronomic  Redactor,  but  was  drawn  from  an 
older  source.  The  detailed  proof  of  this,  however,  does  not  belong 
here. 

*"Ye,  who  exult  in  Lo-dabar,  who  boast,  have  we  not  Ly  our 
strength  reconquered  Karnaim." 


CHAPTER  V 

HOSEA'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM— ESSENCE  OF 
HOSEA'S    PREACHING 

I.    THE  UNITY  OF  CHAPS.  I-III 

HoSEA  no  less  certainly  than  Amos  and  Jeremiah 
looked  upon  the  doom  as  the  foregone  result  of  the 
nation's  guilt.  His  various  appeals  to  do  penance, 
II,  4f.  excepted,^  are  not  addressed  to  the  heedless 
Israel  of  the  present,  which  is  running  headlong  to  de- 
struction, but  to  the  Israel  of  the  future,  which  has  sur- 
vived the  downfall  and,  presumably,  awakened  to  a 
reahzation  of  the  sinfulness  of  its  past  life.  This  holds 
true  of  V,  15  b-VI,  3  and  XIV,  2-9  no  less  than  of  II,  9 
and  16-25.^  Contrary  to  the  opinion  of  those  critics 
who  consider  all  these  passages  the  work  of  later  au- 
thors, it  must  be  remarked  that  they  are  not  only  essen- 
tially Hoseanic  in  spirit,  but  they  follow  directly  from 
the  rest  of  his  preaching,  in  the  light  of  which  they  are 

'  Hos.  X,  12  cannot  be  classed  as  a  plea,  but  is  a  hypothetical  state- 
ment, pointing  out  how  the  coming  ruin  might  have  been  averted. 
Proof  of  this  is  the  immediate  continuation  in  v.  13:  "As  ye  have 
plowed  wickedness  ye  shall  reap  evil,  shall  eat  the  fruit  of  falsehood." 

^  No  positive  conclusion  is  possible  in  regard  to  XI,  7-11,  for,  owing 
to  the  hopeless  text-condition  of  v.  7,  we  are  altogether  in  the  dark 
(i)  in  regard  to  the  interpretation  of  v.  8a,  (2)  in  regard  to  the  ques- 
tion whether  w.  8b-i  i  formed  at  one  time  the  immediate  conclusion 
of  8a,  or  whether  some  intervening  link  dropped  out  either  before  or 
after  8a.  It  must,  however,  be  remarked  that  these  verses  betray 
themselves  both  in  language  and  thought  as  the  genuine  product  of 


240 


HOSEA'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  241 

to  be  interpreted,  and  the  key  to  which,  in  turn,  is  his 
conception  of  God  as  Infinite  Love,  expressed  in 
Chap.  III.  (Of  course,  Volz.  Marti,  and  Guthe  deny 
that  such  was  Hosca's  conception  of  God,  but  their 
view  can  be  upheld  only  by  the  arbitrary  elimination 
of  Chap.  Ill  as  an  unorganic  part  of  Ilosea.^  There  is 
no  particle  of  ground  for  discarding  Chap.  Ill,  but 
every  reason  to  consider  it  genuine;  see  infra). 
Moreover,  these  passages  are  essential  to  the  com- 
pleteness of  Hosea's  prophecies.  Hosea's  belief  in  a 
better  world  to  come  is  really  the  corollary  of  his  dec- 
laration that  God  is  Love — the  necessary  outcome  of 
bis  novel  conception  of  the  relation  between  the  hu- 
man and  the  divine,  to  which  he  was  led  by  the  bitter 
experience  in  his  own  Hfe.  For  Hosea  the  relation 
between  God  and  Israel  is  in  the  nature  of  an  indis- 
soluble ethical  union,  based  not  on  any  mere  legal 
contract,  which  becomes  invalid  as  soon  as  one  party 
violates  the  covenant,  but  based,  like  the  marriage 
bond,  as  he  conceived  it,  on  love  and  moral  obligation. 
The  union  between  God  and  Israel  may  be  inter 
rupted  because  of  the  latter's  sinfulness,  like  the 
prophet's  union  with  his  erring  wife;  but  even  as  Hosea 
'See  P.  Volz,  "Die  Ehegeschichte  Hosea's"  (in  "Zeitschrift  fiir 
VVissenschaftliche  Thcologie,"  XLI,  1898,  pp.  321-335);  Marti, 
"  Das  Dodekapropheton,"  pp.  6,  33f.;  Guthe,  "Der  Prophet  Hosea," 
in  KauLzsch',  II,  pp.  sf.  This  is  not  the  place  for  a  detailed  discus- 
sion of  such  a  radical  procedure  in  general,  nor  of  Volz'  interpretation 
of  Hosea's  stor>'  of  his  marriage  with  Gomer,  in  particular.  It  may  be 
well,  however,  to  remark  that,  altogether  apart  from  other  considera- 
tions, the  lofty  ethics  of  the  prophets  and  the  spiritualization  of 
religion  as  revealed  in  their  lives  and  writings  utterly  exclude  Volz' 
interpretation  of  Hos.  I. — Harper,  "Amos  and  Hosea,"  though  he 
holds  that  "the  fundamental  idea  of  Hosea  is  his  conception  of 
Vahveh  as  a  God  of  Love,"  considers  the  passages  referring  to  Israel's 
future  to  be,  on  the  whole,  of  exilic  origin. 


:>^ 


242  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

trusted  that  by  the  power  of  his  love  his  wife  would 
eventually  be  lifted  above  sin,  so  he  believed  that  by 
the  power  of  the  divine  love  evil  would  in  the  end  be 
conquered  in  Israel  and  good  set  up  in  its  place. 
By  reason  of  this  conception,  however  inevitable 
Hosea  considers  the  destruction  of  the  nation,  he 
cannot  but  see  in  it  a  means  to  an  end.  The  casting- 
off  of  Israel  he  looks  upon  as  a  purifying  punishment 
by  which  God's  love  is  to  work  the  final  salvation  of 
the  people,  and  lead  them  to  a  fuller  union  with  Him- 
self. Accordingly,  he  concludes  Chaps.  I-III,  which 
in  the  story  of  his  Hfe  furnishes  the  key  to  all  his 
preaching,  by  setting  forth  in  II,  16-25  ^  how  this 
regeneration  is  to  be  reahzed.  God  in  His  infinite  love 
will  follow  the  people,  after  the  manner  of  love, 
into  degradation  and  misery,  and  be  with  them  in  all 
the  trials  through  which  they  will  have  to  pass,  until 
finally  He  has  effected  their  change  of  heart  and 
awakened  their  faith  and  love.  In  this  way  "the 
valley  of  tribulation  will  eventually  be  >  converted  into 
a  gate  of  hope''  (II,  17),  and  a  closer  communion  with 
God  be  estabhshed,  a  communion  based  not  only  "on 
righteousness  and  justice  but  on  love  and  fervent 
devotion"  (II,  21). 

If  Marti  finds  the  idea  of  love's  conquering  sin 
incompatible  with  the  view  that  by  severe,  sustained 
punishment  God  will  effect  the  conversion  of  the 
people,-  he  proceeds  from  the  common  error  of  looking 
upon  Love  and  Law  as  antitheses.  He  forgets  that 
true  love  is  neither  blind  nor  indulgent,  but  open-eyed 
and  exacting.     As  the  biblical  writer  expresses  it, 

1  See  Note  at  the  end  of  the  Chapter,  "On  the  Original  Order  of 
Hos.  I-III  and  The  Original  Place  of  II,  1-3." 
^  Op.  ciL,  p.  6. 


HOSEA'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  243 

"God  punishes  him  whom  lie  loveth,  and  afHicteth 
(read  iv'k/ii^cbli  LXX)  him  in  whom  He  delif^hteth."  ^ 
In  contradistinction  to  Law,  which  is  satished  if  the 
wrong  has  been  avenged,  and  the  wrongdoer  punished, 
Love  remains  beside  the  olTendcr,  sharing  with  him  the 
shame  and  misery,  but  not  sparing  him  the  suflering 
and  remorse.  It  punishes  in  order  to  save,  for  it  is 
only  through  suffering,  through  trials  and  self-denial, 
that  the  human  spirit  rises  to  freedom  and  enlighten- 
ment— a  thought  met  with,  fully  developed,  in 
Deutcro-Isaiah.  Thus  Hosea  did  not  take  back  his 
erring  wife  in  order  to  lavish  comfort  on  her,  and  still 
less  to  satisfy  her  sensual  desires,  but  in  the  hope  that 
through  solitude  and  deprivation  she  might  become 
chastened  and  purified,  and  once  more  worthy  of  his 
love. 

It  may  be  mentioned  in  passing  that  the  foregoing 
remarks  make  no  pretension  to  completeness;  Hosea's 
conception  of  God  and  the  experience  in  his  life  which 
opened  his  mind  to  it  are  entered  into  only  in  so  far 
as  they  serve  to  show  how  logically  the  various  sub- 
parts of  Chaps.  I-III  are  developed  out  of  one  an- 
other, or,  inversely,  how  logically  they  merge  into  one 
another  to  form  a  harmonious  whole.  In  view  of  this 
latter  fact  it  is  clear  that  there  is  no  justification  for 
discarding  Chaps.  Ill,  and  II,  9  and  16-25,  or  any 
part  of  them.  Interpolations,  particularly  such 
lengthy  and  material  ones  as  would  be  Chap.  Ill  and 
Chap.  II,  16-25,  never  lit  in  harmoniously  with  the 
work  of  the  original  author,  but  invariably  betray 
themselves  through  some  more  or  less  striking  dis- 
crepancy. 

iProv.III.  12. 


244  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

2.   THE  EPILOGUE,  XTV,   2-9 
SUPPLEMENTARY  TO  THE  DESCRIPTION  OF  HIS  FUTURE 

HOPE  IN  n,  16-25 

As  in  the  opening  part  of  his  preaching,  so  in  the 
conclusion  of  the  same  Hosea  explicitly  sets  forth  the 
purpose  of  the  impending  judgment — with  this  differ- 
ence, however,  that,  while  in  II,  16-25  he  considers 
this  purpose  principally  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
workings  of  the  divine  Love,  in  XIV,  2-9  ^  he  deals 
with  it,  primarily,  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  trans- 
formation through  which  the  people  must  pass. 
The  prophet's  appeal  in  this  epilogue  to  return  to  God 
with  penitent  heart  is  not  addressed  to  contemporary 
Israel,  as  G.  A.  Smith  -  and  Staerk  ^  think,  but  to  a 
future  Israel,  the  Israel  that  will  have  sur\'ived  the 
downfall.  This  is  perfectly  clear  from  "Thou  hast 
incurred  ruin  by  thy  sins"  (v.  2b),  and  also  "They 
shall  again  abide  under  my  shade"  ^  (v.  8a),  both  of 
which  sentences  show  that  the  prophet  has  reference 
to  the  time  after  the  fall  of  the  nation.  There  is 
no  justification  for  the  view,  at  present  taken  by  most 
exegetes,  that  the  epilogue  is  a  product  of  later  times. 
kasalta,  "Thou  hast  incurred  ruin,"  is  prophetic  per- 
fect like  napJfla  .  .  .  hHhidath  jisra'el,  "Fallen  is  the 
virgin  Israel,"  Am.  V,  i,  and  hence  does  not  permit  the 
deduction  that  for  the  writer  the  downfall  is  actually 
a  past  event.    Nor  can  'a/  siis  Id  nirkabh,  "We  shaU 

^  Verse  10  is  a  later  addition,  stating  the  moral  which,  it  was  thought, 
might  be  drawn  from  Hosea's  writings.  The  fact  that  the  passage 
served  as  prophetic  pericope  in  the  synagogue  probably  explains 
the  comment. 

2  See  op.  cit.,  pp.  3Xofif. 

^  See  op.  cit.,  pp.  38f. 

*  Instead  of  b^sillo  read  besilli. 


HOSEA'S  V7E\\'  OF  THE  DOOM 


?45 


not  ride  on  horses,"  (v.  4)  be  considered  a  proof  of  the 
inlluence  of  Is.  XXX,  16  and  XXXI,  i.  In  scoring  the 
people  for  their  blindness,  from  a  religious  as  well  as 
from  a  political  point  of  view,  in  having  sought 
protection  from  the  world-powers,  Hosea  speaks  of 
alliances  formed  with  both  Assyria  and  Egypt;  cf. 

VII,  II,  XII,  2,  and  note  also  IX,  3,  6,  XI,  5,  and 

VIII,  13c  (the  latter  as  read  by  the  LXX).  What 
more  natural,  therefore,  than  to  find  a  reference  to  an 
alliance  with  Egypt  as  well  as  with  Assyria  in  connec- 
tion with  the  prophet's  hope  that  the  future  Israel 
will  be  cured  of  this  fatal  error  of  looking  to  the 
world-powers  for  assistance.  In  the  light  of  this 
fact,  the  expression,  "We  shall  no  longer  ride  on 
horses,"  is  quite  as  clear  in  Hosea  as  in  Isaiah.  As 
to  its  use  in  both,  we  must  conclude  either  that 
the  figure  originated  with  Hosea  and  was  borrowed 
from  him  by  Isaiah,  in  support  of  which  view  it 
may  be  pointed  out  that  there  are  in  Is.  XXX 
and  XXXI  other  traces  of  the  influence  of  Hosea 
on  Isaiah;^  or — and  this  seems  the  more  probable 
theory — that  even  Hosea  has  no  claim  to  the  au- 
thorship of  it,  but  that  it  belongs  in  the  list  of  stock- 
phrases  current  in  that  age.  The  origin  of  the 
expression  is  to  be  seen  in  the  fact  that  the  main 

» Cf.  Hos.  X,  13b,  ki  bhalahla  bh'rikhb'kha  (LXX)  b'robh  gibbo- 
raekha,  "For  thou  hast  put  thy  trust  in  chariots,  in  the  multitude  of 
thy  warriors,"  and  Is.  XXXI,  ib,  'ivajjibhfhu  'al  raekhacbh  ki  rabh 
'o^'al  paralim  ki  'aftnii  m^'od,  "And  they  put  their  trust  in  chariots 
because  they  are  many,  and  in  horsemen  because  they  are  very 
numerous;"  and  also  Hos.  \'III,  4,  himlikhu  w'lo  mimmcutii  hesirU 
'dflo  jadati,  "They  make  kings  without  my  consent,  they  set  up 
rulers  without  my  approval,"  and  Is.  XXX,  i  la^soth  'e^a  w'lo 
tninni  u^linSokh  maiiek/ia  ~<iflu  ruhi,  "To  carry  out  a  purpose  without 
my  consent  and  to  conclude  a  treaty  contrary  to  my  spirit." 


of 


246  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

trade  in  horses  in  ancient  times  was  carried  on  by 
Egypt.i 

Finally,  the  ideas  of  the  epilogue  are  not  at  v'ariance 
with  those  of  the  rest  of  the  book,  as  they  have  been 
repeatedly  argued  to  be.  On  the  contrary,  the  con- 
fession of  sin  which  Hosea  puts  in  the  mouth  of  the 
penitent  Israel  of  the  future  (XIV,  4)  is  altogether 
consonant  with  what  he  considers  the  fundamental 
errors  of  Israel's  religious  and  social-political  life  of  the 
present.  Throughout  Hosea's  prophecies  runs  the 
thought  that,  owing  to  the  people's  utter  lack  of 
knowledge  of  God,  their  worship  of  Yhwh  is  steeped  in 
error,  the  grossest  illustration  of  this  error  being  their 
worship  of  Yhwh  in  images,  or  their  idol-worship  as 
he  also  calls  it  {cf.  IV,  17,  VIII,  4^.,  X,  sf.,  XI,  2, 
XIII,  2).     Equally  prominent  is  the  other  thought 

/that  the  people's  policy  of  seeking  alliances  with  the 
world-powers,  together  with  their  confidence  in  their 
own  military  prowess,  shows  their  lack  of  religious 
faith,  even  as  it  gives  proof  of  their  political  blind- 
ness {cf.  V,  13,  VII,  I  iff.,  VIII,  9,  X,  3f.,  13,  XII,  2). 
But  through  the  fall  of  the  nation  Hosea  expects  that 
the  people  will  at  last  be  brought  to  realize  and  to 
abjure  these  errors  of  their  past  Hfe: 

1  Contrary  to  the  view  expressed  by  Winkler  on  I  Ki.  X,  28  and 
II  Chron.  I,  16  (in  "Alttestamentliche  Untersuchungen,"  p.  i73f.), 
and  endorsed  by  Benzinger  and  Kittel  (in  Marti's  HC  and  Nowack's 
HK  respectively,  ad  loc,  and  also  in  SBOT,  Critical  Notes  on  II 
Chron.  I,  16),  it  must  now  be  considered  an  established  fact  that 
ancient  Egypt  carried  on  the  trade  in  horses  (see  Steuernagel,  "Deu- 
teronomium,"  on  XVII,  16,  Ed.  Meyer  in  "  Sitzungs-Berichte  d. 
Berliner  Akad.,"  1908,  p.  655,  Amn.  i,  Lehmann-Haupt,  "Israel, 
Seine  Entwicklung  im  Rahmen  der  Weltegeschichte,"  pp.  295,  and 
also  Kittel's  change  of  view,  accordingly,  in  Kautzsch ',  ad 
loc). 


HOSEA'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  247 

y 


"Assyria  shall  not  save  us, 
we  will  no  longer  ride  on  horses, 
nor  will  we  call  any  more  the  work  of  our  hands  our 
God." 


In  addition  to  this  negative  declaration,  the  confession 
of  sin  contains  the  positive  acknowledgement  that 
their  salvation  lies  solely  in  their  absolute  reliance  on 
God: 

"For  in  Thee  the  fatherless  findeth  mercy." 

By  this  conclusion  the  confession  touches  incidentally 
on  the  central  idea  of  Hosea's  preaching,  the  idea  that 
fatherly  love  is  the  foremost  attribute  of  God.  And  as 
this  opening  part  of  the  epilogue  is  in  thought  and 
language  altogether  akin  to  the  rest  of  Hosea's  proph- 
ecies, so  does  the  following  part,  with  the  picture  of 
God's  forgiving  love  and  His  readiness  to  recei\«c 
penitent  Israel,  show  all  the  tenderness  and  depth  of 
feeling  which  characterize  Hosea's  writings  in  general./ 
The  epilogue,  therefore,  clearly  bears  the  stamp  of 
Hosea's  individuality,  and,  no  doubt,  received  its 
present  place  from  the  prophet  himself.  In  fact,  we 
may  be  just  as  certain  that  it  was  really  added  by 
Hosea  as  we  were  sure  that  the  Messianic  outlook, 
Am.  IX,  8b-is,  was  not  the  work  of  Amos. 

3.  CHAP,  v,   i5b-vi,  3 
ANOTHER  EXPOSITION  OF  IIIS  FUTURE  HOPE 

Equally  certain  is  Hosea's  authorship  of  V,  15b- VI, 
3.  This  passus,  which,  like  XIV,  2-9,  is  an  appeal  to 
the  future  survivors  of  the  downfall,  forms  a  logical 
conclusion  to  V,  i-i5a,  with  which  it  constitutes  a 


248  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

harmonious  whole.  The  uniformity  in  language  and 
style  between  it  and  the  concluding  verses  of  the 
preceding  prediction  of  judgment  produces  an  effect 
of  unity  which  would  be  impossible  if  it  were  not  an 
organic  part  of  these  verses.  For  no  interpolater, 
however  laboriously  he  imitates  bis  original,  ever 
succeeds  in  producing  the  effect  of  perfect  harmony, 
this  being  the  result  alone  of  that  close  though  subtle 
interdependence  between  form  and  contents  which  is 
essential  in  every  literary  product  of  worth.  Above 
all,  however,  it  is  by  the  thought  expressed  in  v.  3a 
that  these  verses  bear  the  unmistakable  stamp  of 
Hosea's  spiritual  property:  isfnedf'a  nird^pha  ladaath 
^aethjahwcE — ¥salfrenu  khen  nimsa'eil,  as  Giesebrecht 
with  fine  discernment  has  emended  the  second  part 
of  the  half-verse.^  (This  is  one  of  those  rare  emenda- 
tions which,  when  once  discovered,  are  self-evident.) 
Tjie  customary  rendering  of  3aa  fails  to  bring  out  the 
significant  meaning  of  these  words:  nird^pha  lada'atk 
is  not  coordinate  with  7ied^'a,  but  is  a  circumstantial 
clause.    Accordingly,  the  sentence  is  to  be  translated : 

"Ye  shall  know  God  by  aspiring  to  know  Him;  2" 
The  second  part  of  the  half-verse  is  a  modified  expres- 
sion of  the  same  thought : 

1  See  "  Beitrage  zur  Jesaiakritik,"  p.  208.  I  would  add  by  way  of 
explanation  that  the  reading  of  the  Masoretic  text  is  due,  primarily, 
to  false  word-division  in  the  copying  of  a  MS.  which  as  yet  had  no 
word-division,  and  in  which,  besides,  vowel-letters  were  but  sparsely 
used  even  at  the  end  of  a  word,  and,  finally,  in  which  the  silent  H  of 
the  suffix  !in  was  omitted.  Whether  the  J  ending  3D  and  beginning 
^NVCJ  was,  in  the  original  MS.,  written  only  once,  or  whether  its 
omission  in  the  second  case  is  altogether  due  to  a  correction  intro- 
duced by  the  later  copyist  cannot  be  decided. 

2  Jahwa  is  to  be  construed  as  object  with  both  nird^pha  ladaath 
and  nfd^'a. 


HOSEA'S  \IE\V  OF  THE  DOOM  249 

"If  we  but  search  for  Him  we  shall  surely  find  Him." 

The  spiritual  truth  revealed  here  is  tJie  same  that  is 
expressed  in  tlie  Sermon  on  the  Mount:  "Ask,  and  it 
shall  be  given  you;  seek,  and  ye  shall  find;  knock,  and 
it  shall  be  opened  unto  you.  For  ev^eryone  that 
asketh  receiveth,  and  he  tliat  seeketh  findeth;  and  to 
him  that  knocketh  it  shall  be  opened  "  (Matt.  VH, 
7,  8).  And  what  Aug.  Sabatier  remarks  in  regard  to 
the  latter,  applies  with  equal  fitness  to  Hos.  VI,  3: 
"The  search  for  God  cannot  be  fruitless;  for  the 
moment  I  set  out  to  seek  Him,  He  finds  me  and  lays 
hold  of  me."  "The  gift  of  God,"  as  he  expresses  it  in 
another  place,  "  comes  only  to  the  felt  need  and  the 
active  desire  of  man."  ^  Nothing  could  be  more 
characteristic  of  Hosea,  nothing  more  consonant  with 
his  \-iews  in  general  than  the  revelation  of  this  fun- 
damental truth.  FoiJiiis^aJiLnowledge  of  God  is  the 
sum  of  what  man  should  aspire  to,  and  lack  of  knowl- 
edge of  God  the  cause  of  all  evil; — that  vice  and  cor- 
ruption hold  sway,  and  that  "the  spirit  of  whoredom 
possesseth  the  people"  is  for  him  but  the  result  of 
their  not  knowing  God : 

"There  is  no  truth,  no  love,  no  knowledge  of  God  in 

the  land: 
Perjur>',  deceit,  murder,  theft,  and  adultery — 
dissolute  they  are,  and  one  bloody  deed 
follows  on  the  heels  of  the  other."    (IV,  if.;  and  see 

also  V,  4). 

And  here  it  is  important  to  note  that  for  Hosea,  as 
for  the  other  prophets,  knowledge  of  God  is  not  an 
intellectual  acquisition,  not  a  theological  system  or 
creed,  but  means  the  knowledge  or  experience  of 
'  "  Outlines  of  a  Philosophy  of  Religion,"  p.  2^  and  p.  334. 


2  50  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

God  in  one's  heart.  The  end  and  object  of  God's  dis- 
ciplinary work  with  His  faithless  people,  he  sets  forth 
in  II,  21-2  2,  is  to  effect  this  experience: 

"And  I  will  betroth  thee  unto  me  forever; 

I  will  betroth  thee  unto  me  by  the  bond 

of  righteousness  and  justice, 

by  the  bond  of  love  and  fervent  devotion : 

And  I  will  betroth  thee  unto  me  in  faithfulness,  and 

thou  shalt  know  God." 

V,  1 5b- VI,  3,  therefore,  may  well  be  considered  as 
forming,  much  in  the  same  way  as  the  epilogue,  an 
important  supplement  to  the  prophet's  outlook  of 
hope  and  promise,  II,  16-25,  in  that  it  develops  an 
essential  thought  which  in  the  latter,  by  reason  of  the 
aspect  from  which  the  future  restoration  was  con- 
sidered (see  supra),  wsis  brought  out  only  partially — 
the  thought,  that  the  people's  experiencing  God  in 
their  hearts  is  the  condition  of  the  future  consumma- 
tion, in  fact  is  the  consummation. 

VI,  3,  as  indicated  above,  concludes  the  sermon. 
Verse  4,  Hke  the  remaining  verses  of  Chap.  VI,  is  a 
fragment  of  another  sermon.  It  cannot  be  considered 
the  continuation  of  v.  3,  as  most  of  the  exegetes  take 
it,  for  since  w.  1-3  speak  of  sincere  repentance,  of 
true  conversion,  it  is  obvious  that  they  cannot  possibly 
have  been  followed  up  by  an  answer  on  God's  part 
questioning  the  sincerity  of  the  people.^  Apart  from 
this,  the  really  vital  thought  in  this  preeminently 

^  That  w.  1-3  are  "an  earnest  expression  of  faith  and  zeal"  is 
acknowledged  by  Volz,  op.  cit.,  p.  33,  and  by  K.  J.  Grimm,  "Euphe- 
mistic Liturgical  Appendices  in  the  Old  Testament,"  p.  70,  but  this 
fact  is  wrongly  considered  by  them  an  argument  against  Hosea's 
authorship. 


HOSEA'S  MEW  OF  THE  DOOM  251 

spiritual  prayer  seems  to  have  escaped  the  exegctes, 
that  is  the  people's  absolute  assurance,  that  their 
yearning  for  God  will  of  necessity  be  satisfied.  In 
contrast  to  the  prayer  of  the  epilogue,  therefore,  this 
prayer  does  not  call  for  a  reassuring  answer  from  God. 

4.    NOTE    ON   THE    ORIGINAL   ORDER  OF  HOS.    I-III  AND 
THE  ORIGINAL  PLACE  OF  II,   I-3 

Chapter  III,  as  many  scholars  rightly  hold,  must 
originally  have  followed  Chap.  I.  Not  only  is  it 
unlikely  that  the  prophet,  in  telling  the  story  of  his 
life,  would  have  separated  tlie  two  parts  from  one 
another  by  the  discourse,  II,  4-25,  but  this  discourse 
presupposes  Chap.  Ill  as  well  as  Chap.  I.  It  is  the 
detailed  application  of  the  story  of  his  own  Ufc,  as 
given  in  Chaps.  I  and  III,  to  God's  experience  with 
Israel.  Apart  from  this,  I  find  direct  proof  of  this 
original  chapter-arrangement  in  the  description  of 
Israel's  future  restoration,  II,  1-3.  The  diffi(?ulty 
which  this  description  has  presented  to  the  exegetes  is 
very  simply  solved  by  taking  it  as  the  original  con- 
clusion of  III,  or  more  correctly,  as  the  original 
continuation  of  III,  4-5  (exclusive  of  -u/'clh  david 
vialkam  and  IfaJfrilh  hajjamlm).  The  description,  as 
a  whole,  bears  a  close  relation  to  Hosea's  mode  of 
thought  in  I  and  III;  further,  "and  they  shall  appoint 
one  head  "  of  II,  2  refers  directly  to  the  situation 
described  in  III,  4,  "many  days  the  Israelites  shall 
abide  without  a  king  and  without  a  chief,''  being  in 
fact  logically  conditioned  by  it.  On  the  other  hand, 
-ufniqb'su  of  II,  2  is  no  proof  whatever  of  the  exilic 
origin  of  II,  1-3,  since  the  phrase  does  not  mean  "be 
gathered,"  as  many  scholars  take  it,  but  means  here, 
as    frequently    elsewhere,    "assemble"    or    "rally" 


252  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

(cf.  e.  g.  II  Chron.  XX,  4,  XXXII,  4,  Is.  XLV,  20, 

XLVni,  14).  Neither  can  such  a  date  be  argued  on 
the  ground  of  the  author's  hope  for  a  united  Judah  and 
Israel,  for  the  express  mention  of  such  a  hope  on  the 
part  of  Hosea  is  sufficiently  explained  by  the  open 
outbreak  of  hostility  between  Judah  and  Israel,  which, 
as  we  know  from  Is.  IX,  20,  occurred  at  the  time  of  his 
preaching.  Finally,  -uf^alu  min  ha'araes  of  v.  2,  as 
Lambert  (in  Revue  des  Etudes  Juives,  XXXIX, 
p.  300)  suggests,  means  just  as  Ex.  I,  10,  "they  shall 
gain  mastery  of"  or  "dominion  over  the  country." 
(In  further  proof  of  Lambert's  view,  I  shall  add  that 
to  this  meaning  of  'aid  min,  equivalent  to  that  of 
'ala  'al,  Deut.  XXVIII,  43,  the  similar  meaning  of 
'amad  min  in  Dan.  XI,  8  may  be  compared.)  When 
III,  1-5  became  shifted  from  its  original  place  after 
Chap.  I  and  placed  after  Chap.  II,  the  original  con- 
tinuation of  III,  1-5,  that  is  II,  1-3,  being  left  be- 
hind, became  subsequently  joined  to  II,  4-25,  as  if 
it  formed  the  beginning  of  the  same. 

The  translation  of  III,  4-5,  II,  1-3  in  their  proper 
succession  follows : 

III,  4  "For   the   Israelites   shall   abide   many   days 
without  a  king  and  without  a  chief, 
without  sacrifice  and  without  massebah,  with- 
out ephod  and  teraphim. 
5  Afterwards  the  Israelites  shall  return  and  seek 
the  Lord  their  God ; 
they  shall  yearn  for  the  Lord  and  His  good- 
ness. 
II,  I  And  the  number  of  the  Israelites  shall  become 
as  the  sands  of  the  sea  which  cannot  be  meas- 
ured nor  counted, 


HOSEA'S  VIF.W  OF  THE  DOOM  253 

and  in  place  of  their  being  called,  'Ye  arc  not 

my  people.' 
they  shall  be  called   'Children  of  the  living 

God.' 

2  And    the   Judaeans    and    the    Israelites    shall 

assemble 
and   appoint  one  head,   and   they  shall  gain 

dominion  over  the  country, 
for  great  shall  be  the  day  of  Jezreel. 

3  One  shall  call  your  brethren  A  mml  (My  People) 
and  your  sisters  Riihama  (Beloved)." 

(Instead  of  'imril  read  ^atn'ru,  prophetic  perfect;  the 
3rd  plural  is  impersonal  construction.  The  vocaliza- 
tion 'imru  was  caused  no  doubt  by  the  imperative 
ribJiii  of  the  following  verse.) 

"Great  shall  be  the  day  of  Jezreel"  (v.  2):  In  I,  3 
the  prophet  referred  to  the  utter  defeat  of  the  present 
Israel  on  the  plain  of  Jezreel;  here  he  refers  to  the 
triumph  of  the  future  Israel  on  the  same  battle-field — 
great  shall  be  the  day,  he  says  in  effect,  when,  on  the 
famous  battle-field  of  Jezreel,  Israel  shall  again  gain 
dominion  over  the  country. 


CHAPTER  VI 

ISAIAH'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM  AND  HIS  AT- 
TITUDE TOWARD  THE  POLITICAL  AFFAIRS 
OF  THE  DAY 

I.    OPINIONS  OF  PRESENT-DAY  SCHOLARS 

Our  examination  of  the  prophetic  writings  up  to  this 
point  has  borne  out  the  assertion  made  in  Chapter  II 
that  the  prophets  looked  upon  the  doom  as  inevitable, 
and  that  they  neither  expected  nor  designed  that  their 
words  should  influence  the  immediate  course  of  events. 
As  to  Isaiah  there  is  much  difference  of  opinion.  The 
majority  of  bibhcal  scholars,  however,  hold  that 
Isaiah,  unHke  his  predecessors,  Amos  and  Hosea,  did 
not  keep  himself  aloof  from  pohtical  Hfe,  but  that,  like 
the  prophets  of  old,  he  assumed  the  role  of  a  practical 
statesman,  and  approached  the  rulers  of  the  state  with 
precise  directions  as  to  the  course  they  should  pursue 
in  certain  critical  situations.  They  grant  that  he  was 
at  first  scorned  and  rejected,  but  think  that  he  grad- 
ually gained  a  powerful  influence  over  the  government 
and  people,  until  at  last  he  practically  guided  the  helm 
of  state  and  shaped  the  subsequent  development  of 
affairs.  Those  who  hold  this  view  maintain  further 
that  in  the  supreme  crisis  of  the  invasion  of  Judah  by 
Sennacherib's  armies  in  the  year  701,  which  event,  they 
think,  marks  the  height  of  his  influence,  Isaiah  changed 
his  mind  regarding  the  judgment  awaiting  his  people; 
and  that,  instead  of  predicting,  in  consistency  with 

254 


ISMAH  AND  POLITIC.VL  AFF.URS  255 

his  life-long  conviction,  that  the  hour  for  the  execution 
of  judgment  had  at  last  arrived,  he  declared  that 
Ynwii  Himself  would  rise  in  defence  of  Zion  and 
Jerusalem  and  bring  about  the  defeat  of  the  world- 
power,  Assyria,  on  His  o\^^l  holy  mountain.^ 

These  two  points  obviously  have  such  a  decisive 
bearing  on  our  question,  how  the  prophets  viewed  the 
doom,  that  a  discussion  of  them  must  necessarily  be 
interwoven    with    the    discussion    of    this    question. 

2.    ISAIAH'S    E.VRLIEST    PROPHECIES 

(a)   the  consecration  vision 

From  his  consecration  vision,  Chap.  VI,  it  is  clear 
that  at  the  very  outset  of  his  ministry  Isaiah  cherished 
no  illusions  whatever  about  the  situation.  He  fully 
realized  the  insuperable  distance  in  religious  views 
which  separated  his  countrymen  from  him,  and  which 
made  their  case  so  hopeless.  He  knew  that  they  could 
not  comprehend  his  words,  he  knew  that  they  were 

'  See  W.  Robertson  Smith,  "The  Prophets  of  Israel,"  pp.  205-210, 
254ff.,  296,  320,  330!!.,  350II.;  Wellhauscn,  "  Israelitische  und  Jiidische 
Geschichtc"  (1901),  pp.  1242.;  Smend,  "  Alttcstamcntliche  RcIIr- 
ionsgeschichtc,"  *  pp.  231-240,  255(1.;  Gicsebrecht,  "Die  Berufsbe- 
gabung  der  Alttestamentlichen  Propheten,"  pp.  84f.;  Budde,  "Reli- 
gion of  Israel  to  the  Exile,"  i47f.,  I53ff.;  Driver,  "Isaiah:  His  Life 
and  Times,"  pp.  3,  32,  62,  69-83;  11.  P.  Smith,  "Old  Testament  His- 
tory," pp.  238,  244,  255;  Ch.  F.  Kent,  "  A  History  of  the  Hebrew 
People,"  pp.  128, 130, 142,  I44ff.,  148(1.;  F.Wilkc,"Jcsaia  und  Assur" 
(1905),  pp.  if.,  57ff.;  Stacrk,  op.  cil.,  pp.  64,  68,  85(1.;  Kittcl,  "Ge- 
schichte  des  Volkes  Israel"  (1909),  II,  pp.  477,  486,  494(1.,  501,  505ff.; 
Hans  Schmidt  in  "Die  Schriften  des  Alten  Testaments  herausgcg. 
von  Grcssmann,  etc.,"  II,  2,  pp.  i2(T.  On  the  point  of  Isiiiah's  sup- 
posed change  of  view  regarding  the  doom  cf.  also  Kautzsch,  "  Hil)- 
lische  Theologie  des  Alten  Testaments,"  pp.  258f.,  and  Meinhold, 


2  56  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

doomed.  How  ineffectual  he  felt  his  preaching  to  be 
for  his  own  age  may  be  seen  from  his  bitter  declaration 
in  vv.  gi.  that  the  purpose  of  his  mission  was  "to  dull 
their  hearts,  to  deafen  their  ears,  and  to  blind  their 
eyes," — that  is  to  say,  to  demonstrate  their  utter 
corruption  and  spiritual  blindness,  and  so  to  make 
clear  their  ripeness  for  judgment. 

There  is  no  occasion  to  suppose  that  this  vision  was 
written  in  the  light  of  his  later  experience.  The  central 
fact  of  the  vision  is  the  revelation  to  the  prophet  of 
God's  inexorable  decree  of  judgment.  Were  we  to 
question  the  trustworthiness  of  the  prophet's  descrip- 
tion of  what  passed  in  his  mind  in  that  hour,  we  could 
no  longer  attach  value  to  the  vision,  in  any  respect,  as 
a  record  of  his  spiritual  experience.  It  is  illogical  to 
look  upon  the  account  as  a  valuable  record  of  the 
turning-point  in  his  Hfe  and  to  maintain,  at  the  same 
time,  that  it  is  colored  by  his  later  experiences— more 
specifically,  that  the  tone  in  which  the  prophet  speaks 
of  the  purpose  of  his  mission  is  owing  to  the  lack  of 
response  which  his  message  in  due  course  received, 
instead  of  to  the  hopelessness  with  which  he  started 
out  on  his  ministry.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  same  tone 
prevails  in  II,  6-22,  which  all  agree  dates  from  the 
very  year  of  his  call  to  prophecy,  and  also  in  IX,  7- 

op.  cit.,  pp.  i3sff.;  the  latter  thinks  that  this  change  of  view  dates 
at  least  as  far  back  as  711  (pp.  i4ff.) 

Fr.  Kiichler,  "Die  Stellung  des  Propheten  Jesaia  zur  Politik  seiner 
Zeit,"  joins  issue  with  this  view  of  Isaiah's  poHtical  influence,  though 
he  holds  with  the  above-mentioned  scholars  that  during  the  Assyrian 
invasion  Isaiah  did  change  his  mind  regarding  the  doom  threatening 
the  country  (cf.  pp.  VI,  27f.,  43,  47,  $2i.  56).  Kiichler,  as  he  states  in 
the  preface,  pp.  Vf.,  wrote  this  treatise  in  order  to  show  by  one 
example  how  utterly  untenable  Winkler's  theory  of  Old  Testament 
Prophecy  is. 


IS.UAII  AND  POLITIC.\L  AFFAIRS  257 

X,  4+V,  26-30,  which,  most  cxcgctcs  agree,  belongs  to 
the  earliest  period  of  his  activity. 

And  not  only  does  Isaiah  make  himself  clear  regard- 
ing the  incvitableness  of  the  judgment,  he  is  equally 
emphatic  on  the  point  that  the  destruction  is  to  be  not 
a  partial  but  a  complete  one.  To  his  question,  "How 
long?"  that  is,  how  long  it  shall  be  the  purjDose  of  his 
mission  to  demonstrate,  so  to  speak,  the  total  apathy 
of  "tliis  people"  (the  people  of  his  own  age),  God's 
answer  is: 

''Until  the  cities  be  desolate,  without  inhabitants, 

and  the  houses  be  destitute  of  men, 

and  the  land  be  converted  into  a  desolation, 

and  God  have  removed  mankind, 

and  the  desolation  be  great  in  the  land; 

and  should  there  be  a  tenth  still  left, 

this  in  turn  shall  fall  a  prey  to  destruction, 

like  the  terebinth  and  the  oak  of  which  when  felled 

only  the  stump  remains."  ^ 

The  comparison  is  to  the  same  effect  as  that  in  XVII, 
5f.   (of   the  prophecy  of   the  immediately  following 

^  Zaera  qodaeS  ma^^abhta,  as  the  majority  of  scholars  hold,  is  a 
later  addition;  how  late  may  be  seen  from  the  fact  that  the  LXX  did 
not  read  it. 

Hackmann's  theory  (in  "Die  ZukunftserwartunR  des  Jcsaia,"  pp. 
72Cf.)  that  in  the  vision,  Chap.  VI,  and  in  the  proi)hccics  of  the  first 
period  of  his  activity  Isaiah  is  concerned  with  Northern  Israel  only, 
and  that  it  is  the  latter  that  is  understood  by  "this  people  "  of  v.  9, 
has  no  basis.  Hackmann  overlooked  the  fact  that  by  "and  I  dwell 
among  a  people  of  unclean  lips"  (v.  5)  Isaiah  made  it  perfectly 
clear  that  his  native  country,  Judah,  was  certainly  included  in  the 
verdict  passed  on  the  people  in  his  consecration-vision  (c/.  G.  Bu- 
chanan Gray,  "The  Book  of  Isaiah,"  I,  p.  110) 


2  58  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

period),  where  of  the  destruction  of  Israel  the  prophet 

says: 

"It  shall  be  as  when  the  harvestman  grasps  the 

standing  grain, 
and  his  (other)  arm  reaps  the  ears- 
Yea,  it  shall  be  as  when  the  ears  are  gleaned  in  the  Vale 

Rephaim ; 
or  gleanings  shall  be  left  as  at  the  beating  of  an  olive 

tree — ^ 
two  or  three  berries  in  the  top  branch, 
four  or  five  in  the  (other)  branches  of  the  fruit-tree."  ^ 

An  analogous  comparison  in  Amos  is : 

"As  the  shepherd  rescues  from  the  mouth  of  the  Hon 
a  couple  of  shin-bones  or  the  tip  of  an  ear, 
precisely  so  shall  the  Israelites  escape 
who  sit  in  Samaria  in  the  corner  of  the  couch  .  .  ." 
(Am.  Ill,  12). 

In  all  these  comparisons,  the  idea  expressed  is  that 
the  nation  shall  be  reduced  to  nothingness;  those 
surviving  the  destruction  will  no  more  constitute  a 
body  poHtic  than  the  stump  of  a  tree  forms  a  tree. 

(b)  his  future  hope — X,  21-23 

Thus  understood,  VI,  13  in  no  wise  conflicts  with 
Isaiah's  future  hope,  to  which  he  gave  expression  soon 

1  In  order  to  fully  understand  the  second  comparison  one  must 
bear  in  mind  that  the  olives  are  picked  by  hand,  and  what  is  left  after 
the  picking,  being  beyond  reach  of  the  hand,  is  knocked  off  with  a 
pole.  What  remains  after  the  latter  process  will  be  a  few  scattered 
berries  that  were  overlooked  or  missed  by  the  pole,  just  as  after  the 
gleanings  have  been  gathered,  only  a  few  stray  ears  may  still  be 
found  in  the  field. 

2  Read,  with  different  word-division,  bis'iphe  happorijja. 


ISAIAH  AND  rOLITICAL  AFFAIRS  259 

after  his  summons  to  prophecy  in  the  name  he  be- 
stowed on  his  son,  S/ic\ir  Yashiih,  "A  Remnant  shall 
Return;"  for  this  name,  as  Marti  points  out,  implies  a 
r.^nfirmation  rather  than  a  denial  of  the  judgment.  It 
'-,Miities.  however,  that  the  remnant,  /.  c,  the  survi- 
\  ors  of  the  judgment,  shall  become  converted.' 

That  this  is  really  the  significance  of  She\ir  Yashuh 
there  can  be  no  doubt,  for  the  utterance  in  which  at 
the  time  Isaiah  explained  the  meaning  of  his  son's 
name  has  not  been  entirely  lost,  as  is  generally 
thought,  but  has  been  preserved  in  its  essential  part 
in  X,  21-23.  In  proof  of  this  it  is  not  necessary  to 
enter  into  a  critical  analysis  of  the  whole  of  X,  5-34, 
which,  biblical  scholars  are  agreed,  is  made  up  of 
heterogeneous  elements.^  It  will  sufBce  for  our 
purpose  to  point  out  that  vv.  21-23  are  clearly  not  the 
original  continuation  of  v.  20,  since  the  author  of  the 
latter  looks  upon  the  destruction  as  an  actual  occur- 
rence (Israel  or  the  House  of  Jacob  are  actually  for 
him  a  ^^ar  and  p'lelath,  "a  remnant"  and  "  those  who 
have  escaped"  from  the  catastrophe),  while  for  the 
author  of  w.  21-23  the  destruction  is  yet  to  come; 
and  that,  just  as  clearly,  they  cannot  have  formed 
originally  a  part  of  w.  24-27;  for  they  have  an 
ominous  tone,  emphasizing  that  the  destruction  is 
inexorably  decreed,  while  vv.  24-27  are  of  an  alto- 
gether reassuring  nature,  bidding  the  people  dispel 
all  fear  since  their  deliverance  from  their  vanquisher 
is  at  hand. 

Internal  evidence  that  X.  21-23  is  a  fragment  of  an 
utterance  designed  to  e.xplain  the  name  of  the  proi)h- 
et's  son,  She'ar  Yashub,  is  not  lacking:  (i)  It  has  in 

'  See  "Das  Buch  Jesaia,"  on  Chap.  VI,  3. 
*See  infra,  pp.  2732.  and  28sff. 


26o  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

common  with  Isaiah's  older  prophecies,  i.  e.,  those 
of  the  first  period  and  those  of  the  time  of  the  Syro- 
Ephraimitic  campaign,  the  expression,  "Yaakob," 
used  to  designate  the  whole  nation  (see  supra,  p.  236). 
(2)  Like  the  consecration  vision  it  emphasizes  that 
"the  destruction  inexorably  decreed"^  will  be  com- 
plete, will  engulf  "  the  whole  country"  (v.  23;  cj.  to  the 
b^qaeraebh  kol  ha'araes  of  the  latter  the  heqaeraehh 
ha'araes  of  VI,  13).  (3)  By  killajdn  hams  soteph 
fdaqa  of  v.  22,  "destruction  is  unalterably  decreed 
sweeping  in  righteousness  Uke  a  flood,"  it  pointedly 
reiterates  what  Isaiah  developed  at  length  in  his 
description  of  the  Day  of  Yhwh,  II,  6-22,  V,  15-16,^ 
which  belongs  unquestionably  to  the  oldest  of  his 
prophecies,  viz.,  that  by  the  certain  destruction  of 
nation  and  country  alone  might  the  way  be  prepared 
for  the  recognition  of  God's  moral  kingdom  among 
men.  Since  X,  21-23,  therefore,  dates  from  the 
period  in  which  his  son.  She  'ar  Yashub,  was  born,  and 

^  kala  w^naeh'^rasa  of  v.  23  is  a  hendiadys. 

2  V,  isf.,  no  doubt,  got  misplaced  in  Chap.  V  from  II,  6-22,  where 
originally,  in  all  probability,  it  formed  the  closing  refrain  of  the  now 
completely  mutilated  third  strophe  of  the  latter.  XVII,  7-8  may  be 
another  misplaced  part  of  this  strophe,  but  the  evidence  is  not  so 
convincing  as  in  the  case  of  V,  isf.  In  the  latter  case  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  verses  were  first  omitted  from  their  proper  place,  then 
added  in  the  margin  and  later,  when  the  MS.  was  being  recopied, 
inserted  in  the  wrong  place  in  the  body  of  the  text  (see  supra,  p.  116, 
n.  2).  Proof  of  this  is  the  identity  of  V,  15a  with  II,  ga,  which  is  to  be 
explained  in  the  following  way:  II,  9a  is  to  be  considered  as  the  open- 
ing words  of  the  original  closing  refrain  of  the  third  strophe  (II,  6-22, 
it  is  generally  granted,  have  come  down  to  us  in  complete  disorder) 
and  V,  15a  as  the  repetition  of  these  same  words  in  the  margin  for  the 
purpose  of  indicating  the  place  where  the  omission  belongs. — For  the 
rearrangement  of  the  first  two  strophes  of  II,  6-22  cf.  Marti,  op.  cit. 
pp.  34f.5  and  Gray,  op.  cH.,  pp.  49f. 


IS.VIAII  AND  rOLITIC.VL  AIFAIRS  261 

since  its  contents  are  so  directly  applicable  to  the 
missing  utterance  regarding  the  name  S/ic\ir  Yashuh, 
it  is  safe  to  conclude  that  it  is  really  a  fragment  of  that 
utterance: 

"A  remnant  shall  return, 
a  remnant  of  Jacob  unto  the  mighty  God. 
Even  though  thy  people  be  as  the  sands  of  the  sea, 
a  mere  remnant  of  them  shall  return; 
destruction  is  unalterably  decreed, 
sweeping  in  righteousness  like  a  flood. 
For  an  unalterable  decree  of  destruction 
the  Lord,  God  Sabaoth,  shall  execute  on  the  whole 
land." 

(c)  DC,  7-x,  4+v,  25b-30 

Chapter  IX,  7-X,  4  and  its  original  conclusion, 
V,  25b-3o/  may  serve  as  another  illustration  of  the 
hopelessness  with  which  Isaiah  from  the  very  start 
viewed  the  situation.  This  sermon,  which  also  uses 
"  Ya'akob  "  to  denote  the  whole  nation,  is  addressed  to 
Israel  and  Judah  alike,  though,  like  Hosea's  prophecies 

'  V,  25b-30  is  another  instance  of  a  lengthy  omission  which  was 
first  added  in  a  blank  space  of  the  MS.  and  later  inserted  from  there 
in  the  wrong  place.  The  case  affords  a  good  insight  into  the  un- 
critical, altogether  mechanical  procedure  of  the  ancient  copyists. 
The  copyist  who  was  responsible  for  the  omission  took,  for  his  part, 
unusual  pains  to  indicate  where  the  omitted  passage  belonged;  he 
repeated  not  merely  one  or  two  of  the  immediately  preceding  words, 
but  the  whole  refrain,  "  In  spile  of  all  this  His  anger  hath  not  been  ap- 
peased, and  His  hand  is  still  outstretched,"  with  which  the  preceding 
strophe,  X,  1-4,  closed;  yet  all  his  precautions  were  wasted  on  the 
later  copyist,  who  doubtless  gave  no  thought  whatever  to  the  matter, 
but  inserted  the  passage  at  the  point  where  he  found  it.  The  identi- 
fication by  modem  scholars  of  V,  26-30  as  the  original  conclusion  of 
IX,  7-X,  4  was  due  primarily  to  the  repclilion  of  the  refrain. 


2  62  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

and  to  a  certain  extent  also  Amos',  it  deals  specifically 
with  the  conditions  in  the  Northern  Kingdom,  no 
doubt  because  it  was  prompted  by  the  civil  war  raging 
there.  By  the  emphatic  ha' am  hillo,  "the  entire  peo- 
ple," of  V.  8,  the  prophet,  right  in  the  opening  of  the 
speech,  makes  it  clear  that  the  whole  nation,  his  own 
countrymen  as  well  as  the  citizens  of  Ephraim  and  Sa- 
maria, will  suffer  the  effects  of  God's  "word  "  (i.  e..  His 
decree  of  judgment).  Further,  the  prophet  devotes  a 
whole  strophe  (X,  1-4)  to  the  conditions  in  his  home- 
state.  It  would  be  altogether  arbitrary  to  throw  out 
this  strophe,  as  some  have  done,  as  not  originally  be- 
longing to  this  sermon;  it  is  not  at  all  incongruous  with 
the  preceding  strophes,  nor  with  the  general  drift  of 
the  sermon;  for  in  IX,  7-20  the  prophet  does  not  Hmit 
himself  to  the  retrospect  of  the  reverses  which  the 
people  of  Northern  Israel  have  been  suffering,  but 
side  by  side  with  this  retrospect  describes  the  corrup- 
tion which  pervades  all  classes  of  society  there — cor- 
ruption of  which  the  present  state  of  anarchy  is  but 
the  culmination. 

Indeed,  X,  1-4,  with  its  description  of  the  wholesale 
perversion  of  justice  prevaihng  in  Judah,  forms  a 
fitting  supplement  to  the  picture  presented  in  IX,  7-20 
of  the  degeneracy  of  the  sister-kingdom.  Moreover,  it 
is  very  probable  that  the  retrospect  of  IX,  7-20  even 
contained  a  reference  to  reverses  suffered  by  Judah. 
The  sare  r^sin  in  v.  10,  as  is  widely  acknowledged,  is 
certainly  not  original  text;  the  phrase  is  not  only  in 
itseh  strange,  but  in  its  present  connection  admits  of 
no  satisfactory  interpretation.  Apart  from  this,  there 
is  nowhere  in  the  records  any  mention  of  an  attack  of 
Aram  on,  or  even  of  a  hostile  attitude  of  Aram  toward, 
Northern  Israel  at  that  time;  but  II  Chron.  XXVIII, 


ISAIAH  AND  rOLITIC.VL  AFFAIRS  263 

17  records  an  attack  of  Edom  on  Judah,  and,  what  is 
particularly  important,  records  it  as  occurring  simul- 
taneously with  an  attack  of  the  Philistines  on  Judah 
(//).,  V.  18).  This  circumstance,  to  my  mind,  makes  it 
fairly  conclusive  that,  instead  of  'aram  miqqacdacm, 
V.  II  of  Isaiah's  retrospect  originally  read  "^dom 
miqqaedacm,  and  that  thus  by  the  words,  "Edom  on 
the  East  and  the  Philistines  on  the  West,"  Isaiah  had 
reference  to  this  simultaneous  attack  of  Edom  and  the 
Philistines  on  Judah.  (Note  that  in  II  Ki.  XVI,  6, 
where  the  attack  of  Edom  on  Judah  is  likewise  re- 
corded, the  original  "^dom  in  the  first  part  of  the  verse 
was  both  times  similarly  misread,  while  in  the  second 
part  not  only  the  LXX  and  Targ.,  but  also  the  Kcre 
of  the  Masorites,  has  correctly  '""domim  for  the  Kethlb 
'"romim})  With  such  a  deduction  it  accords  that 
in  the  preceding  v.  10  the  LXX  read  }'V  in  iv  tou? 
iiraviarafievox/i  eVt  6po<;  "Eeicov — "the  adversaries  of 
ISIt.  Zion"— for  the  questionable  p^n  nv.^ 

As  of  the  description  of  the  Day  of  Yhwh,  it 
may  be  said  of  IX,  7-X,  4,  V,  26-30  that  Isaiah 
expatiates  therein  on  the  revelation  he  received  in  the 
consecration-vision.  Only,  in  the  former  he  develops 
more  fully  the  idea  of  God's  holiness,  which  must 
destroy  everything  impure  opposing  it,  while  in  the 
latter  he  dwells  at  length  on  the  total  apathy  of  the 

'  r'sin,  as  Klostcrmann,  "  Die  Biichcr  Samuclis  und  dcr  Kcinige," 
ad  loc,  points  out,  was  not  inserted  in  the  verse  until  after  the  mistake 
'"ram  had  crept  into  the  text. 

'  The  mistaken  reading  of  the  Masoretic  text  is  due  to  false-word- 
division  in  the  copying  of  an  archetype  which  had  as  yet  no  word- 
division;  the  copyist  joined  the  T  of  TH  to  pv  reading  pVl  and  mis- 
took the  n  for  a  vowel-letter  of  the  defectively  written  "IV  (H  occurs 
occasionally  in  Aramaic  as  vowel-letter  of  the  plur.  masc.  construct 
state). 


264  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

people,  to  demonstrate  which,  he  declared  in  the 
consecration- vision,  seemed  to  him  the  immediate 
purpose  of  his  mission.  All  the  dire  calamities  that 
God  has  been  visiting  on  the  nation,  the  prophet  points 
out,  have  been  to  no  effect.  Neither  the  crushing 
defeat  which  they  have  suffered  from  the  hands  of 
their  enemies,  nor  the  civil  war  which  has  wrought 
havoc  in  the  country,  has  availed  to  make  the  people 
recognize  God's  punishing  hand  and  effect  "their 
return  to  Him  that  hath  been  smiting  them."  Blind 
to  the  fact  that  their  lawlessness  has  brought  them  to 
the  verge  of  ruin,  the  people  "speak  in  their  pride  and 
haughtiness  of  heart : 

Bricks  have  fallen  down,  but  with  quarry  stones  shall 

we  rebuild; 
Sycamores  have  been  felled,  but  with  cedars  shall  we 

replace  them." 

Thus  Wickedness  prevails  unabated,  spreading  to  and 
infecting  all  classes  of  society: 

"For  Wickedness  burneth  like  fire: 

Consuming  thorns  and  briars, 

It    (spreads)    kindling    the    thickets    of    the    forest, 

upwards  they  whirl  in  columns  of  smoke." 

Because  of  these  conditions  the  day  of  visitation  is 
at  hand,  their  destruction  is  certain — destruction 
from  which  there  will  be  no  escape,  which  will  sweep 
away  them  and  their  earthly  glory  aHke.^  The  nation 
which  God  has  called  upon  to  execute  the  judgment  is 
a  mighty  and  an  irresistible  one,  and  it  will  sweep  down 

^  Isaiah  here  (X,  3)  touches  briefly  on  what  he  developed  in  full  in 
his  description  of  the  Day  of  Yhwh,  II,  6-22  etc.,  that  at  God's 
appearance  for  judgment  all  earthly  glory  must  sink  in  the  dust. 


IS.UAH  AND  POLITIC.VL  AFFAIRS  265 

upon  the  country  as  the  lion  assails  his  prey.  Though 
Isaiah  does  not  mention  the  nation  by  name,  there 
can  be  no  doubt  that  he  means  Assyria.  The  ex- 
pression "from  the  end  of  the  earth"  (v.  26)  is  to  be 
accounted  for,  like  the  similar  expressions  in  Jeremiah 
and  Deutero-Isaiah  referred  to  on  p.  49,  n.  i,  by 
the  fact  that  for  the  prophets  the  territory  of  Assyria 
formed  the  geographical  horizon  to  the  east. 

3.   THE  PROPHECIES  OF  THE  FOLLOWING  PERIODS 

Isaiah's  prophecies  of  the  following  periods  show  in 
no  wise  any  change  or  modification  in  his  view  of  the 
situation  from  that  revealed  in  his  earliest  prophecies. 
Whether  we  turn  to  VII,  3-14,^  16-21,^  23-25,  and  to 
Vm,  1-8,-  11-18  of  the  time  of  the  Syro-Ephraimitic 
campaign,  or  to  XXVIII,  1-4,  7-23,  dating  either 
from  the  time  of  the  siege  of  Samaria  or  from  the 
immediately  preceding  time,^  or  to  XXIX,  1-4,  5C-6, 

'  Verses  15  and  22  were  added  later,  after  v.  14  had  come  to  be 
understood  as  a  Messianic  prediction — a  prediction  which,  as  the 
context  shows,  was  far  from  Isaiah's  thoughts.  He  had  reference 
in  V.  14  not  to  the  remote,  but  to  the  immediate  future,  that  is  to 
say,  to  the  turn  which,  he  believed,  events  would  take  in  less  than 
a  year's  time.  The  full  discussion  of  this  much-debated  point,  how- 
ever, can  be  taken  up  only  hand  in  hand  with  the  intcrjirctalion  of 
VII,  3-25,  as  a  whole,  in  Volume  II.  This  prophecy  (like  the  follow- 
ing VIII,  itT.)  dilTers  in  its  literary  character  from  other  pro[)hecies  in 
that,  owing  to  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  the  case  of  which  the 
prophet  wished  to  convey  a  true  picture,  it  has  the  form  of  a  memoir. 

*  Verses  9-10,  which  break  the  sequence  of  thought  are  a  later 
addition,  due,  like  the  additions  in  the  preceding  chapter,  to  the 
tendency  of  later  times  to  put  a  Messianic  construction  on  the  pro- 
phecy. The  words,  "Immanu  El,"  at  the  close  of  verse  8,  arc  part  of 
the  addition;  they  form  its  beginning. 

*  XXVIII,  1-4,  7-22,  as  we  shall  show  in  Volume  II,  must  have 
formed  from  the  start  an  organic  whole,  the  second  part  of  which 


266  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

9-14,  and  XXX,  1-17,  and  XXXI,  1-4  of  Isaiah's 
last  period  of  activity — the  time  of  Judah's  alHance 
with  Egypt,  704-702 — we  find  that  the  prophet  speaks 
with  the  same  positiveness  of  the  irremediable  bhnd- 
ness  and  corruption  of  the  people  and  of  their  certain 
doom. 

Besides  this,  the  strongest  possible  evidence  that 
this  fundamental  conviction  of  his  underwent  no 
change,  either  in  the  time  of  the  Syro-Ephraimitic 
campaign  or  in  the  initial  years  of  Judah's  alliance  with 
Egypt  (704-702),  is  furnished  by  the  prophet's  state- 
ments relative  to  the  preservation  of  his  prophecies  of 
these  respective  periods.  In  regard  to  the  latter 
period  he  is  just  as  outspoken  as  to  his  reason  for 
preserving  his  prophecies  as  we  found  he  was  in  regard 
to  the  former  (see  supra,  p.  169).  He  declares  that 
since  his  words  have  been  ineffectual  for  his  own 
age,  they  must  be  saved  for  a  future  and — the  impHca- 
tion  is — a  more  discerning  generation,  in  order  to 
prove  to  them  the  truth  of  God's  word: 

"Now  go,  write  it  ^  down,^  inscribe  it  Mn  a  scroll, 
that  it  ^  may  serve  as  a  lasting  testimony  (r.  la'ed)  in 

the  days  to  come; 
for  it  is  a  rebeUious  people,  faithless  sons  they  are, 
sons  who  will  not  hear  the  revelation  of  God, 
who  say  to  the  seers,  'See  not,'  and  to  the  prophets, 

shows  no  less  clearly  than  the  first  that  it  was  delivered  prior  to  the 
downfall  of  Samaria. 

1  Instead  of  the  sing,  suffix  and  the  3rd  sing,  of  the  verb,  the  LXX, 
it  is  important  to  note,  read  the  plural  suffix  and  the  3rd  plural 
respectively:  "write  them  down,  inscribe  them  in  a  scroll,  that  they 
may  serve,"  etc. 

2  'al  lu'^h  HUam  is  a  gloss,  as  ^al  sephaer  shows.  It  is  probably  to 
be  ascribed  to  the  influence  of  VIII,  if. 


IS.UAH  .VXD  POLITICAL  AFF.VIRS  267 

'Do  not  prophesy  to  us  the  truth  I 
Speak,  to  us  ilatterics,  prophesy  delusions! 
Get  out  of  our  way,  begone  from  our  path! 
Leave  us  in  peace  about  the  Holy  One  of  Israel!'" 
(XXX,S-ii). 

More  expressive  even  arc  Isaiah's  words  in  the 
subsequent  prophecy  of  this  period,  where,  in  a  strain 
similar  to  that  employed  in  the  consecration-vision 
almost  forty  years  earUer,  he  declares  that  God  has 
stricken  the  people  with  blindness  and  apathy:  he 
continues  significantly  for  our  purpose: 

"Therefore,  the  prophecy  of  all  this  is 

for  you  like  the  words  of  a  sealed  book, 

which  if  one  hands  to  a  learned  man, 

saying,  pray,  read  this,  he  replies, 

I  cannot,  for  it  is  sealed; 

and  which  if  one  hands  to  one 

who  is  not  learned,  sa>ing,  pray,  read  this, 

he  replies,  I  am  not  learned  "    (XXIX,  11-12). 

Is  it  likely  that  Isaiah  would  have  viewed  his  life- 
work  in  such  a  light  if,  during  the  twenty  years  of  his 
acti\'ity  previous  to  this,  he  had  been  steadily  gaining 
in  influence,  if  he  had  reached  the  point  where  his 
counsel  was  eagerly  sought  by  King  and  people,  and 
his  words  carried  the  weight  of  conviction  to  his 
hearers?  It  is  very  clear  the  prophet's  thoughts  were 
not  bent  on  efTecting  the  conversion  of  his  contem- 
poraries, and  still  less  were  they  set  on  influencing 
the  direction  of  the  affairs  of  state.  Isaiah  sim[)ly 
preached  the  word  of  God.  as  it  was  revealed  to  him, 
to  a  people  who  would  not  listen — to  a  deaf  and  faith- 
less people. 


268  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 


4.   THE     THEORIES     ADVANCED     IN     EXPLANATION     OF 
ISAIAH'S  ALLEGED  CHANGE  OF  VIEW  UNTENABLE 

As  to  Isaiah's  alleged  change  of  view  regarding  the 
doom  in  the  following  year,  that  is  at  the  time  of  the 
Assyrian  invasion  in  701,  it  will  be  seen,  after  the 
deductions  of  the  previous  paragraphs,  that  such  a 
change  is,  on  the  face  of  the  matter,  unlikely.  It 
would  be  at  variance  with  those  basic  views  from 
which  his  whole  preaching  proceeds,  and  it  cannot 
be  reconciled  with  the  well-poised,  positive  personality 
which  the  prophet  presents  throughout  his  career. 
If  Isaiah  suddenly  changed  his  lifelong  view  on  the 
most  vital  point  of  his  preaching,  we  may  be  sure  that 
it  was  an  event  of  the  greatest  moment  to  himself;  that 
it  was  not  the  result  of  mere  whim  or  momentary 
vacillation,  but  of  positive  reasoning,  the  psychology 
of  which  could  certainly  be  traced.  Kittel's  apology, 
"We  have  no  assurance  that  doubts  and  all  sorts  of 
contradictory  elements  were  not  mingled  together  in 
his  consciousness,"  ^  does  not  touch  the  point  at 
all,  and  the  explanation  of  Wilke  and  Staerk,  that 
Isaiah's  supposed  change  of  view  regarding  the  doom 
was  the  result  of  his  altered  estimation  of  Assyria, 
but  confuses  the  issue,  and  imputes  to  the  prophet 
motives  which  were  altogether  foreign  to  his  mode  of 
thought.  It  cannot  be  too  strongly  emphasized  that 
Isaiah's  view-point  in  regard  to  the  poHtical  af- 
fairs of  the  day  was,  like  that  of  the  other  great 
prophets,  not  that  of  a  statesman,  but  of  a  re- 
ligious idealist. 

^Geschichie  des  Volkes  Israel,  II,  p.  511. 


IS.\I.\H  .\ND  POUTIC.\L  AFF.VIRS  269 


5.    ISALVII  S  GUIDING  PRINCIPLE— FAITH 

When  Isaiah  in  the  years  705-702  condemned 
Judah's  alliance  with  Kgyj)t.  which  had  been  formed 
for  the  purpose  of  shaking  oil  the  Assyrian  yoke,  he 
was  not  guided  by  any  insight  into  the  pohtical  con- 
steUation,  nor  by  any  shrewd  understanding  of  the 
trend  which  matters  were  bound  to  take  in  the  Orient, 
but  by  that  spiritual  truth  which  was  to  him  a  law 
throughout,  that  truth  which  at  the  time  of  the 
Syro-Ephraimitic  campaign,  734,  (when  he  scored 
Ahaz  for  his  appeal  to  Assyria  for  aid)  he  crystallized 
in  the  words  '/;;/  lo  iJia  ^'^minil  kl  Id  ihcamenu: 

"If  ye  have  not  faith,  verily  ye  shall  not  endure" 
(VII,  9b). 

In  accordance  with  this  spiritual  law,  the  only 
policy  which  Isaiah  recommended  in  the  crisis  of  the 
Syro-Ef)hraimitic  campaign,  and  again  in  the  critical 
years  of  704-702,  was  that  of  hasqct  ubhitha,  of  "re- 
fraining from  action  and  trusting  (in  God),"  that  is 
of  abandoning  all  efforts  at  self-defence  and  reiving 
absolutelv  on  God  (VII,  4,  XXX,  iff.,  cj.  also  VIII, 
i2f.  and  XXVIII,  i6f.). 

This  idea  of  faith  is,  essentially,  the  same  principle 
that  underlies  the  view-point  of  all  the  literary  proph- 
ets in  regard  to  the  material  strength  and  political 
safeguarding  of  the  nation.  But  Isaiah  developed 
the  idea  more  fully  and  forcibly  than  any  of  the  others. 
He  was  the  first  to  make  it  clear  that  trust  in  God 
meant  for  a  nation  righteous  government — conform- 
ity with  the  divine  standard  of  holiness,  cJ.  XXVIII, 
17  and  V,  16: 


2  70  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

"And  I  shall  make  justice  the  rule  and  righteousness 
the  standard. 

On  that  day  the  Lord  Sabaoth  will  be  exalted  by  jus- 
tice, 

and  the  Holy  God  will  show  Himself  Holy  by  right- 
eousness." 

He  was  the  first  to  define  holiness  in  the  purely  ethical 
sense  and  to  draw  the  practical  conclusions  from  it  for 
humanity  {cf.  especially  VI,  3-8  of  the  consecration- 
vision).  And  he,  more  clearly  than  any  other,  defined 
the  beUef  that  it  is  not  by  material  forces,  or,  to  use  a 
modern  term,  not  by  economic  necessity,  that  man- 
kind endures  and  progresses,  but  by  purely  spiritual 
forces;  and  that,  wherever  these  essential  spiritual 
forces  are  not  in  the  ascendancy,  the  life  of  nations  as 
well  as  of  individuals  is  doomed  to  destruction. 
Isaiah's  conception  of  progress  is  characteristically 
expressed  in  his  poetic  description  of  the  future  com- 
monwealth (IX,  1-6): 

"The  people  that  walk  in  darkness  shall  see  a  great 

light; 
Upon  those  that  dwell  in  the  land  of  the  shadow  of 

death 
Light  shall  shine  forth  "    (v.  i). 

This  faith  which  stamps  Isaiah  as  a  religious  idealist 
rather  than  as  a  practical  statesman  is  sufficient  an- 
swer to  the  theory  advanced  by  Staerk  and  Wilke  in 
explanation  of  the  change  of  attitude  which  they  be- 
lieve he  underwent  toward  Assyria.  These  scholars 
argue  that  in  the  first  three  decades  of  Assyria's  as- 
cent under  Tiglath-Pileser  III  and  his  successors,  Sal- 
manassar  IV  and  Sargon,  Isaiah  recognized  in  the 


ISAIAH  AND  POLITIC.\L  AFFAIRS  271 

aggressive  policy  and  invincible  power  of  Assyria  an 
ethical  factor,  which,  as  a  contrast  to  the  decadent 
life  in  the  small  kingdoms  of  Syria  and  Palestine,  he 
hailed  with  enthusiasm,  but  that,  in  consequence 
of  his  close  and  intimate  acquaintance  with  the 
Assryian  hon  at  the  time  of  the  invasion  of  Judah  by 
Sennacherib's  armies,  and  the  insight  afforded  him 
then  in  the  real  design  of  Assyria,  he  radically  changed 
his  attitude  toward  the  Assyrian  world-power.^ — 
To  ascribe  such  reasoning  to  Isaiah  is  to  make  Isaiah 
an  exponent  of  Nietzsche's  Ilerrcnmoral.  Nietzsche's 
ethics,  however,  and  Isaiah's  religious  views,  or  for 
that  matter,  prophetic  religious  views  in  general, 
differ  from  each  other  as  widely  as  the  poles.  Assyria's 
imperialism  was  the  very  opposite  of  divine  rule,  was 
directly  contrary  to  the  standard  of  divine  holiness 
according  to  which  Isaiah  measured  and  judged  every 
procedure.  Neither  Isaiah,  nor  indeed  any  other 
prophet,  could  ever  have  viewed  Tiglath-Pileser's  or 
Sargon's  conquests  in  any  other  light  than  as  the 
embodiment  of  brute  force  and  unrestrained  greed. ^ 
And  in  this  connection  it  will  not  be  amiss  to  mention 
that  the  imperialistic  dream  so  in  evidence  in  the 
Messianic  hope  of  post-exilic  times  was  entirely  absent 
from  the  future  hope  of  the  great  prophets,  whose 
conception  of  ideal  government  was  altogether  spir- 
itual. Furthermore,  it  would  not  have  taken  Sen- 
nacherib's appearance  in  Judah  and  the  havoc  wrought 
by  him  in  the  countr}''  to  convince  Isaiah  of  the  true 
character  and  design  of  the  Assyrian  world-power. 
The  conquest  of  Gilead  and  Galilee  and  the  deporta- 

'  See  Staerk,  op.  cil.,  pp.  57f.,  64,  75,  81,  Ssff.,  and  Wilke,  op.  cit., 
pp.  ifif.,  23ff.,  5i,54fl.,95ff. 

'  Cf.  the  interpretation  of  X,  5-19,  infra,  pp.  aSsff. 


272  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

tion  of  their  inhabitants  by  Tiglath-Pileser,  and  still 
more  the  conquest  of  Samaria  and  the  exile  of  the 
people  by  Sargon  to  remote  parts  of  the  Assyrian 
empire,  would  have  more  than  sufficed  to  open  his 
eyes  in  this  respect,  for  we  may  rest  assured  that 
Isaiah  did  not  view  the  dowoifall  of  the  sister-kingdom 
from  the  standpoint  of  an  indifferent  onlooker.  Both 
Tiglath-Pileser  and  Sargon,  it  should  be  pointed  out, 
were  mightier  conquerors  than  Sennacherib.  Their 
wars,  and  also  those  of  Salmanassar,  were  no  less 
bloody  than  those  of  Sennacherib,  though  they  did 
not  happen  to  emphasize  this  feature  in  their  records 
to  the  extent  that  the  latter  did.  And,  what  is  still 
more  important,  it  was  Tiglath-Pileser  who  intro- 
duced the  system  of  transplanting  the  conquered 
nations  to  other,  remote  countries  for  the  purpose  of 
effecting  their  disintegration,  and  both  he  and  Sargon 
carried  out  this  poKcy  quite  as  brutally  and  rigor- 
ously as  did  after  them  Sennacherib. 

6.   NO  DISCREPANCY  IN  ISAIAH'S  PROPHECIES 

There  is  then  nothing  in  the  circumstances  of  the 
case  or  in  the  prophet's  views  in  general  to  corroborate 
the  assumption  that  Isaiah  changed  his  mind  regard- 
ing the  doom.  And  if  we  consider  the  question  from 
the  other  end,  that  is,  in  regard  to  the  utterances 
which  gave  rise  to  the  assumption,  we  shall  find  that 
the  discrepancy  which  has  called  forth  so  much  apol- 
ogy and  explanation  is  in  reahty  more  seeming  than 
real.  The  prophecies  and  passages  that  come  in 
question  are: 

(a)  X,  5-19;  (b)  X,  20,  24-27  (exclusive  of  'ol 
mipp^ne  Samaen^  which  close  the  verse),  and  XIV, 

The  words,  which  yield  no  sense  as  they  read  at  present,  belonged 


IS.UAH  AND  rOLITIC.VL  AFFAIRS  273 

-M-27;  (c)  X.  27C-34;  (d)  XIV,  28-32;  (c)  XVII,  12- 
XVIII,  6;  (f)  XXIX,  5a-b,  7-8;  and  (g)  XXXI,  5-9. 
Oi  these  we  shall  reserve  X,  5-19  for  the  last  and 
consider  the  second  group  first. 

(a).    X,    20,    24-27 +XIV,    24-27.      A   POSTEXILIC  PRODUCT 

Biblical  scholars  are  agreed  that  X,  20  and  24-27  are 
not  by  Isaiah,  but  are  a  product  of  postexilic  times,^ 
but  they  make  the  mistake  of  including  also  vv.  21-23 
in  this  spurious  passage.  These  verses,  however,  as 
has  been  shown  above,-  are  no  part  of  20  and  24-27, 
but  are  a  fragment  of  a  genuine  utterance  of  Isaiah 
which  got  wrongly  put  in  here.  The  fragment,  XIV, 
24-27,  contrary  to  the  opinion  of  Cheyne  that  it  origi- 
nally formed  a  part  of  X,  5ff.,^  does  not  show  organic 
connection  with  that  prophecy,  nor  for  that  matter,  as 
is  generally  admitted,  with  any  other  prophecy  of 
Isaiah.  Cheyne  can  uphold  his  view  only  by  omitting 
25b  from  the  fragment  in  question,  on  the  ground  that 
it  is  a  later  insertion,  and  by  throwing  out  X,  15  (or 
i6)-i9  as  a  later  addition  to   X,  5-14  (or  15),  thus 

originally  to  v.  28,  from  which  they  were  wrongly  separated;  their 
first  part,  there  can  be  no  doubt,  is  to  be  read  'old  mi  and  in  />'mc 
iamaen  the  name  of  a  place  must  be  contained;  Duhm  suggests  p^nl 
rimmoti. 

'  As  elsewhere  in  postexilic  literature  (cf.  Is.  XIX,  23fT.,  Zach. 
X,  lof.,  Ps.  LXXXIII,  9,  Kzr.  VI,  22)  by  'aisur  in  v.  24  is  not  meant 
ancient  Assyria,  but  the  heirs  of  the  .Xssyrian  realm,  the  kingdom  of 
the  Selcucidae.  Note  that  the  Greek  name  Si'pia  (Talmudic  'acrae^ 
iurid)  is  the  shortened  form  of  'Ao-orvpia  and  that  by  k'lhabh 
a  iuri  in  Talmudic  literature  "the  Syriac"  or  "Aramaic  characters" 
are  meant. 

*See  supra,  pp.  259f. 

*  Sec  "  Introduction  to  the  Book  of  Isaiah,"  p.  79. 


2  74  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

placing  XIV,  24-27  immediately  after  v.  14  (or  15). 
X,  15-19,  however,  as  we  shall  see  later,  forms  one 
piece  with  X,  5-14,  of  which  it  is  the  immediate  con- 
tinuation, while  25b  is  a  vital  part  of  XIV,  24-27,  con- 
taining as  it  does  the  clue  both  to  the  authorship  and 
to  the  original  place  of  XIV,  24-27.  From  the  contents 
of  the  half- verse:  "And  his  yoke  shall  be  removed  from 
them,  his  burden  be  removed  from  their  shoulders," 
it  immediately  becomes  plain  that  XIV,  24-27  are 
closely  related  in  thought  and  language  to  X,  20, 
24-27,  and  in  fact  they  fit  in  perfectly  between  v.  20 
and  V.  24.  Moreover,  by  inserting  XIV,  24-27  here, 
the  lakhen,  "therefore,"  introducing  X,  24,  which  at 
present  has  no  point,  whether  vv.  21-23  are  left  in  or 
omitted, becomes  at  once  most  logical: — in  XIV,  24-27 
Yhwh  avers  that  His  plan  to  bring  about  the  crush- 
ing defeat  of  the  Assyrian  world-power  (i.  e.,  of  the 
Seleucidic  Kingdom,  as  pointed  out  above)  in  His  own 
country  and  on  His  own  mountain  shall  abide,  and 
that  this  plan  cannot  be  thwarted;  and  X,  24!?., 
likewise  put  in  the  mouth  of  Yhwh,  continues  that, 
this  being  the  case,  Yhwh's  people  that  dwells  in 
Zion  need  not  fear  the  Assyrian,  who  (at  present) 
smites  it  with  the  rod  and  holds  his  stick  over  it,  as  did 
Egypt  of  old;  for  but  a  little  while  yet,  and  Yhwh's 
wrath  with  His  people  will  be  spent,  and  his  scourge 
will  be  brandished  against  Assyria,  and  will  vanquish 
it,  as  Midian  and  Egypt  of  old  were  vanquished. — It 
hardly  needs  to  be  remarked  that  the  thought  atmos- 
phere in  X,  20,  XIV,  24-27,  X,  24-27  is  strikingly  at 
variance  with  that  of  Isaiah's  prophecies.  All  these 
verses  reflect  the  expectations  characteristic  of 
postexilic  Judaism  and  quite  commonly  expressed 
in  the  literature  of  that  time.  . 


ISMAH  AND  POLITICO.  AFF.VIRS  275 

(b)    X,     27C-34.       OXE    OR    TWO    FRAGMENTS— IRRELEVANT    TO 
TUE   QUESTION   AT   ISSUE 

X.  27C-34  is  a  fragment  consisting  of  two  parts, 
vv.  27C-32,  and  vv.  33-34.  The  former,  which  has 
some  points  of  contact  with  Mic.  I,  10-16,  describes 
how  an  invading  enemy  will  that  very  day  by  forced, 
rapid  marches  descend  upon  Zion-Jenisalem  and  deal 
it  a  destructive  blow.  In  consistency  with  the  trend  of 
thought  of  27C-32,  w.  33-34,  if  an  original  part  of 
these,  can  only  be  understood,  as  J.  D.  Michaehs  ^ 
and  others  interpreted  them,  as  describing  by  the 
figure  employed,  not  the  defeat  of  the  invader,  but 
the  laying  low  of  Zion-Jerusalem — an  interpretation 
demanded,  moreover,  by  the  concluding  words, 
"and  the  Lebanon  shall  fall  by  a  mighty  one,"  since 
"the  Lebanon"  is  invariably  used  as  descriptive  of 
Palestine.  If  vv.  33-34,  however,  are  not  an  orig- 
inal part  of  27C-32,  but  are  merely  another  fragment, 
it  is  clear  that  we  have  no  clue  whatever  either  to  their 
origin  or  to  the  particular  circumstances  to  which  the 
verses  have  reference,  so  that  in  no  case  can  these 
verses  come  into  consideration  for  the  question  con- 
cerning us  here.  Neither  is  there  any  certain  clue, 
it  should  be  added,  to  the  time  of  origin  of  vv.  27C-32, 
but  if  Isaiah  is  the  author  of  them,  the  time  of  the 
conquest  of  Samaria  would  suggest  itself  as  a  far 
more  probable  date  than  the  time  of  the  invasion  of 
Judah  by  Sennacherib.  The  march-route  described 
is  the  route  that  would  be  traversed  by  an  army  ad- 
vancing from  Samaria  against  Jerusalem. 

*  Sec  "Deutsche  Ubcrsctzung  dcs  Alt.  Test's,  mit  Anmcrku  gen," 
ad  he. 


276  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

(c)   XIV,    28-32.     ANOTHER  POST-EXILIC  PRODUCT 

This  oracle,  if  genuine,  would  certainly  have  some 
bearing  on  the  question  at  issue,  since  it  closes  with 
the  emphatic  declaration  that  ''Yhwh  hath  founded 
Zion,  and  in  it  the  afHicted  of  His  people  shall  find 
shelter."  However,  the  oracle  cannot  make  claim  to 
the  authorship  of  Isaiah  for  the  simple  reason  that  the 
historical  situation  described  in  it  is  quite  different 
from  the  conditions  which  existed  at  any  time  during 
Isaiah's  ministry.  It  may  be  briefly  remarked  that 
the  older,  in  part  traditional,  interpretation,  sug- 
gested by  the  pseudo-date  of  the  oracle  ("in  the  year 
of  King  Ahaz'  death"),  which  takes  the  "basihsk" 
as  applying  to  Hezekiah,  and  "the  serpent"  and  "the 
rod"  of  Phihstia's  slayer,  accordingly,  as  applying  to 
Ahaz,  is  altogether  excluded;  for  such  a  meaning  of 
V.  29  would  presuppose  that  Ahaz  was  victorious  over 
Phihstia,  while,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  just  the  opposite 
was  the  case  (c/.  II  Chron.  XXVIII,  18).  Apart 
from  this,  the  author  of  the  oracle  expects  the  enemy 
threatening  Philistia  to  invade  the  country  from  the 
north  (v.  31),  but  an  attack  by  Judah,  Philistia's 
immediate  neighbor  to  the  east,  could  be  carried  out 
only  from  the  eastern  frontier. 

It  is  obvious,  too,  that  the  situation  described  in 
V.  29  does  not  correspond  to  that  presented  by  Assyria 
at  the  death  of  Tiglath-Pileser  HI  or  of  Sargon;  for, 
in  accordance  with  the  meaning  which  nisbar,  if  used 
of  men  and  countries,  invariably  has  (cf.  e.  g.  Is. 
XXIV,  10,  Jer.  XIV,  17,  XL VIII,  4,  17,  Dan.  VIII, 
8),  "the  rod  that  smote  thee  hath  been  broken"  (nis- 
b'^rd)  can  mean  only  that  the  power  that  subdued  and 
tyrannized  over  Phihstia  has  been  vanquished,  and 


ISAIAH  .\ND  POLITIC.\L  AFFAIRS  277 

Ass^Tia,  we  know,  did  not  sulTor  any  disruption  nor 
even  any  setback  at  the  death  of  either  Tiglath- 
Pileser  or  Sargon.  The  same  holds  true  of  Assyria 
after  the  death  of  Salmanassar  IV;  its  p(nver  stood  as 
firm  and  solid  as  ever,  even  though  the  fleath  of  this 
monarch  meant  the  coming  of  a  new  line  of  rulers  to 
the  throne.  Least  of  all  does  the  battle  at  Dur-ilu  in 
the  second  year  of  Sargon's  reign  furnish  the  key  to 
the  situation  in  v.  29,  as  Winkler,'  Cheyne,-  and  Staerk ' 
believe,  for  the  encounter  of  Sargon  with  Humbani- 
gash  was  an  altogether  insignificant  event,  a  mere 
drawn  battle,  as  is  obvious  from  the  fact  that  both 
sides  claimed  the  victory.  And  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  "the  rod  that  smote  thee  hath  been  broken" 
admits  of  no  other  interpretation  than  the  one  stated, 
viz.,  that  the  power  which  has  heretofore  held  domin- 
ion over  Philistia  has  been  vanquished,  Duhm  is 
right  in  pointing  to  Alexander's  victory  over  Persia  at 
Issos  in  tlie  year  7,2,2,  ^-  C.  and  the  time  prior  to  his 
conquest  of  Tyre  and  Gaza  as  the  most  likely  key  to 
the  situation  described  in  the  oracle.'* 

It  remains  to  be  added  that  "Out  of  the  root  of  the 
serpent  hath  come  a  basilisk,  and  a  flying  dragon  is  its 
fruit"  (v.  29b)  is  a  typical  example  of  the  enigmatic, 
figurative  style  so  characteristic  of  the  historical 
descriptions  in  apocal>ptic  literature."  the  oldest 
products  of  which  date  from  the  close  of  the  Persian 
and  the  beginning  of  the  Greek  period:  "out  of  the 

'  " .\UtesUnienlliche  Untcrsuchungcn,"  pp.  137^- 
«0^.  ci/.,pp.  8off. 
» Op.  cit.,  pp.  6of. 
*  Sec  "  Das  Buch  Jcsaia,"  p.  97. 

'  The  genesis  of  such  descriptions  frequently,  no  doubt,  is  to  be 
sought  in  mythobgicai  notions. 


2  78  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

root  of  the  serpent"  is  not  another  figure  applying  to 
Philistia's  slayer,  but  the  whole  half-verse  is  a  most 
adequate  figurative  description  of  the  invincible 
Alexander,  as  he  impressed  his  contemporaries,  and 
of  his  father,  the  great  Philip. 

(d)   x\'n,    i2-x\'in,   6.    a  number  of  fragments  which 

ADMIT  OF  NO  CONCLUSION 

XVII,  I2-XVIII,  6  has  in  common  with  XXIX, 
5a-b,  7-8,  and  XXXI,  5-9  that  it  is  fragmentary,  but 
differs  from  XXIX,  5,  etc.,  where  the  situation  is 
in  part  clear,  and  from  XXXI,  5-9,  where  it  is  al- 
together clear,  and  where,  besides,  the  prophet's 
reasoning  underl>-ing  the  utterance  is  perfectly  lucid, 
in  that  it  does  not  afford  us  any  real  insight  into 
either  of  these  all-important  particulars. 

In  the  first  place,  the  question  is  whether  XVII, 
12-14  and  XVIII,  1-6  are  one  or  two  fragments;  and 
the  fact  is  that,  whether  considered  from  the  point  of 
view  of  form  or  contents,  they  make  the  impression  of 
being  separate  pieces,  independent  of  one  another: 
"This  is  the  portion  of  our  despoilers,  and  the  lot  of 
our  plunderers"  (XVII,  14b)  reads  like  the  conclusion 
of  a  sermon,  or  more  correctly  Kke  the  conclusion  of  a 
psalm,  and  XVIII,  if.,  on  the  other  hand,  begins  like 
a  new  sermon. 

From  the  point  of  \'iew  of  the  contents  the  two 
pieces  present  insuperable  difficulties.  XVII,  12-14 
leave  us  wholly  in  the  dark  about  the  identity  of  the 
hosts  of  nations  arrayed,  as  well  as  about  the  object 
and  scene  of  their  attack,  the  mention  of  them  in  the 
concluding  verse  as  "our  despoilers"  and  "our  plun- 
derers" being  the  only  descriptive  reference  to  them. 
XVIII,  1-6  are  quite  obscure,  except  for  vv.  1-2, 


ISAIAH  AND  POLrnC.-\L  AFFAIRS  27Q 

which  are  addressed  to  "the  land  .  .  .  beyond  the 
rivers  of  Kush  "  or  rather  to  the  envoys  sent  from  this 
land,  bidding  them  depart  whence  tlicy  came.  The 
obscurity,  it  is  important  to  note,  arises  from  the 
fact  that  vv.  3-6  are  comprised  of  several  fragments 
(whether  of  one  or  more  than  one  utterance  cannot  be 
decided),  and  these  fragments  as  they  stand  at  present 
show  no  logical  connection  either  with  vv.  1-2  or 
among  themselves.  Verse  4  can  have  formed  the 
continuation  of  v.  3  only  in  the  case  that  the  latter  was 
preceded  originally  by  some  verses  which  indicated 
what  it  was  that  "  the  inhabitants  of  the  world  and  the 
dwellers  on  earth  shall  see  and  hear,"  as  also  what 
occurrences  are  referred  to  by  "when  the  banner  is 
raised  and  the  trumpet  is  blown."  Further,  after  v.  4 
and  again  after  v.  5  there  is  clearly  a  gap;  for  the  for- 
mer leaves  us  in  the  dark  as  to  the  particular  occur- 
rences or  processes  toward  which  God  will  observe  the 
placid,  serene  atritude  described,  and  the  latter  does 
not  show  what  is  meant  to  be  conveyed  by  the  figure 
of  the  grape-vine  ripening  to  vintage  and  of  the 
lopping  oflf  of  the  branches  and  cutting  ofT  of  the 
tendrils.  However  ingenious  are  the  respecdve 
interpretations  of  Marti '  and  Duhm  ^  of  w.  4  and  5, 
both  scholars  read  more  into  the  text  than  is  per- 
missible. Finally,  v.  6  cannot  {X)ssibly  have  formed 
the  immediate  continuation  of  v.  5,  for,  aside  from 
ever}'thing  else,  the  striking  contrast  in  style,  the 
highly  poetic  and  figurative  language  of  the  one  and 
the  plain  prose  of  the  other,  preclude  that  they  could 
have  directly  followed  one  another;  even  lesser  authors 
than  Isaiah  would  not  be  guilty  of  producing  anything 
so  discordant.     To  this  must  be  added  that  neither 

'  Op.  cit.,  ad  loc.  *  Op.  cil.,  ad  loc. 


28o  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

w.  5  and  6  nor  the  preceding  verses  furnish  any  due 
as  to  who  the  people  are  that  are  to  be  left  as  prey  to 
the  carrion-birds  and  beasts — a  point  which  bears 
further  evidence  to  the  fragmentariness  of  the  whole 
passus.  In  view  of  this  fragmentary  character  and  the 
general  obscurity  of  w.  3-6,  it  remains  uncertain  even 
whether  these  verses  are  in  any  way  related  to  1-2,  i.  e., 
whether  they  are,  either  all  or  in  part,  the  residua 
of  a  prophecy  which,  as  it  would  seem  from  w.  1-2, 
Isaiah  delivered  on  the  occasion  of  the  arrival  of 
envoys  from  "beyond  the  rivers  of  Kush"  in  Je- 
rusalem. But  however  this  may  be,  it  is  certain  that 
neither  XVII,  12-14  ^^^  XVIII,  1-6  permit  any 
inference  in  regard  to  the  question  concerning  us 
here,  the  question  viz.,  of  Isaiah's  beheved  change  of 
attitude  regarding  Assyria  and  change  of  mind  regard- 
ing the  doom  awaiting  Judah. 

(e)    XXIX,    5a-b,    7-8.      A    FRAGMENT    OR    MORE   PROBABLY   AN 
INTERPOLATION 

XXIX,  5  (exclusive  of  the  last  three  words,  isfhaja 
I'phaetha  pith'om,  which  belong  to  the  following  v.  6), 
7-8  give  expression  to  the  beHef  that  certain  hostile 
hosts  that  are  arrayed  against  Zion-Ariel  shall  meet 
with  such  utter  defeat,  that  they  and  the  terror  caused 
by  them  will  appear  hke  a  nightmare.  Inasmuch  as 
these  verses  utterly  contradict  vv.  1-4,  5C-6  (the 
latter  being  the  immediate  continuation  of  the  former) 
and  also  vv.  9-14,  it  is  obvious  that  they  cannot  be 
an  original  part  of  the  prophecy  XXIX,  iff. — This 
prophecy  in  vv.  1-4,  5C-6  predicts  the  very  opposite 
of  5a-b,  7-8,  viz.,  that  God  Himself  shall  take  the  field 
against  Zion-Ariel  and  destroy  His  ''altar-hearth"- 


IS.\IAH  AND  rOLITIC.VL  AFFAIRS  281 

city,  and  in  vv.  9-14  gives  the  reason  for  this  action: 
He  is  going  to  deal  destruction  to  His  people  because 
of  their  spiritual  blindness  and  their  ritualistic  piety. 
The  insertion  of  vv.  5a-b,  7-S  may  be  explained 
in  cither  of  two  ways.  They  may  be  the  fragment  of 
another  prophecy  of  Isaiah's  on  the  same  issue  as 
that  with  which  he  deals  in  XXXI,  5-9,  and  the  frag- 
ment may  have  been  inserted  here  purjwsely  by  edi- 
tors of  a  later  age  in  order  to  take  the  sting  out  of  the 
prophecy,  v\\  iff.,  and  to  give  it  a  construction  more 
in  harmony  with  the  beliefs  of  their  own  times.  Or 
these  later  editors  may  for  the  same  reason  have 
added  these  verses  themselves,  for  there  is  no  doubt 
that  this  prophecy,  more  than  any  other  prophecy  of 
Isaiah's,  must  have  given  offence  to  later  ages,  since  it 
dealt  a  scathing  blow  to  their  holiest  and  most  cher- 
ished beliefs.  The  second  possibility  seems  to  me  the 
more  likely  one  for  the  following  reasons:  (i)  The 
verses  have  in  common  with  the  prophecy,  vv.  iff.,  the 
name  Ariel  applied  to  Zion-Jerusalem,  but,  while  in  vv. 
iff.  it  is  used  by  Isaiah  with  apparent  sarcasm  (see 
infra,  pp.  293f.),  in  v.  7  it  is  evidently  used  with  the 
significance  associated  with  the  name  in  the  minds  of 
the  people.  It  is,  however,  not  likely  that  Isaiah  would 
at  any  time  have  used  the  word  in  this  sense,  least  of 
all  after  he  had  used  it  as  a  taunt  a  short  time  be- 
fore. (2)  It  may  reasonably  be  assumed,  if  Isaiah  had 
spoken  these  verses,  whether  at  the  time  of  the  siege  of 
Jerusalem  by  Sennacherib's  armies,  or  at  any  time 
when  the  country  was  threatened  by  an  attack  from 
Assyria,  that  he  would  not  have  referred  to  the 
Assyrian  hosts  in  such  general,  indefinite  terms  as 
"the  multitude  of  all  the  nations"  (vv.  7  and  8), 
"the  multitude  of  thine  enemies"  and  "the  multitude 


282  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

of  tyrants"  (v.  5),  but  would  have  referred  to  them  by 
name  as  in  XXXI,  5-9. 

But  even  if  the  fragment  were  a  product  of  Isaiah's, 
it  would  still  not  permit  the  inference  that  at  the  time 
of  the  Assyrian  crisis  Isaiah  cherished  the  belief  that 
Assyria  would  meet  with  destruction  at  Zion,  for  the 
possibility  would  have  to  be  reckoned  with  that  what 
at  present  seems  to  be  an  absolute  prediction,  might 
appear,  if  we  had  the  complete  prophecy  or  a  sufhcient 
part  of  it,  to  be  meant  conditionally  only.  This  view 
of  the  case,  it  will  be  seen  presently,  is  directly  sug- 
gested by  XXXI,  5-9. 

(f)  XXXI,   5-9  A  CONDITIONAL  PREDICTION 

Contrary  to  the  view  taken  of  XXXI,  4  by  some 
scholars,^  it  is  certain  that  it  cannot  form  a  part  of 
vv.  5-9.  sahhd  'al  invariably  implies  hostile  inten- 
tion, never  protective  purpose  (cf.  XXIX,  yf.,  Num. 
XXXI,  7,  Zach.  XIV,  12),  and  therefore  the  verse 
predicts  the  very  opposite  of  what  v.  5  promises.  It 
must  belong  to  the  preceding  prophecy,  w.  1-3,  to 
which  it  forms  a  fitting  continuation — the  prophet 
declares  in  effect  that  the  alliance  with  Eg>pt  will  not 
avail,  the  less  so  since  God  Himself  is  arrayed  against 
Zion.  In  the  emphasis  which  this  latter  thought 
receives,  the  verse  forms  a  parallel  to  XXIX,  iff.,  just 
as  in  the  expression  of  the  futility  of  their  alliance  with 
Egypt  verses  1-3  form  a  parallel  to  XXX,  1-7  and  16. 
The  meaning  of  the  simile  employed  in  v.  4  is  that  it 
would  be  as  impossible  to  thwart  Yhw^e's  design 
against  them  by  means  of  Eg^-pt's  aid  as  it  would  be 

^  Among  others  by  Dillmann-Kittel,  Der  Prophet  Jesaia,  ad  loc, 
and  Duhm,  op.  cit.,  ad  loc. 


ISAIAH  AND  POLITIC.\L  AFF.URS  2S3 

to  rescue  the  prey  from  the  jaws  of  a  lion  even  by  the 
efforts  of  a  host  of  shepherds. 

Verse  7,  which  breaks  the  sequence  of  thought,  is 
not  an  original  part  of  w.  5-9;  the  verse  got  in  here  by 
mistake  from  XXX,  i8ff.,  where  it  fits  in  perfectly 
after  v.  22.^ 

With  verse  7  eliminated,  XXXI,  5-9  is  well- 
connected  and  complete  in  itself,  though  the  original 
beginning  of  the  prophecy  is  missing.-  The  prophecy 
holds  out  the  prospect  of  the  protection  of  Jerusalem 
against  Assyria  and  of  tlie  defeat  of  the  latter  by  the 
direct  intervention  of  Yh\\'h;  and  many  scholars 
have  seen  in  this  a  proof  that  in  the  crisis  of  the  year 
701  Isaiah  predicted  that  in  the  last  extremity  Yhwh 
would  Himself  protect  Jerusalem  and  strike  down  the 
Assyrian  invader.  They  have,  however,  overlooked  a 
most  essential  fact,  viz.,  that  the  imperative  hlbliii  of 
v.  6  forms  with,  jagen  of  v.  5  and  naphal  and  the  follow- 
ing verbs  of  vv.  8  and  9  a  compound  conditional  prop- 
osition, it  being  the  protasis  of  both  the  preceding  v.  5 
and  the  following  vv.  8  and  9;  and  that  hence  vv.  5  and 
8-9  make  no  absolute  prediction,  only  a  conditional 
one: — Yhw'h's  rising  in  defence  of  Jerusalem  and  His 
destroying  Assyria  is  contingent  on  Israel's  renouncing 
its  deep-rooted  apostasy  and  returning  to  God: 

"Like  hovering'  birds,  so  God  Sabaoth  will  shelter 

Jerusalem, 
shelter  and  deliver,  spare  and  rescue  it, 

'  XXX,  18-33  together  with  its  original  opening  part,  XXIX, 
17-24,  is  a  postexilic  product. 

*  It  may  be  pointed  out  that  even  if  v.  4  could  be  taken  as  a  part  of 
vv.  5-9,  the  prophecy  would  still  be  without  a  beginning. 

'  'apkdth  is  potential  participle,  its  meaning  properly  being  "in  a 
flying  position"  {see supra,  p.  108.). 


284  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

if  ye  return  to  Him  from  whom  ye  have  fallen  away  so 

radically; 
then  Assyria  will  fall  by  the  sword  of  no  mortal, 
and  the  sword  of  no  earthly  being  will  consume  it — 

It  will  flee  from  the  sword,^ 
and  his  picked  soldiers  will  be  put  to  hard  service; 
and  his  rock  will  vanish  out  of  fear, 
even  his  captains  will  flee  affrighted  from  the  standard, 
saith  the  Lord  who  hath  a  fire  in  Zion  and  a  furnace  in 

Jerusalem." 

The  prophecy  in  no  wise  contradicts  Isaiah's  Kfe- 
long  convictions,  but,  on  the  contrary,  is  quite  con- 
sistent with  them.  Isaiah  points  out  the  one  course  by 
the  adoption  of  which  the  present  crisis  could  and, 
without  fail,  would  be  averted.  He  did  the  same  thing 
at  the  time  of  the  Syro-Ephraimitic  campaign,  and 
again  on  the  completion  of  the  alliance  with  Egypt, 
which  precipitated  the  alarming  situation  of  the  year 
701  {cf.  XXX,  i5f.).  For  though  he,  like  the  other 
prophets,  was  well  aware  that  his  preaching  fell  on 
deaf  ears,  he  was  convinced,  even  as  they,  that  if 
only  a  spiritual  regeneration  of  his  contemporaries 
might  be  effected,  no  power  on  earth  could  thence- 
forth prevail  against  them; — their  future  would  be 
assured.     Jer.  XXI,  12  furnishes  a  striking  parallel: 

1  "From  the  sword,"  i.  e.  from  God's  sword, — the  sword  of  swords: 
a  case  of  emphatic  indetermination  (see  supra,  p.  107);  cf.  the 
parallel  case  Job  XIX,  29,  "Fear  the  sword"  (mipp^ne  haeraebh) — /.  e. 
the  avenging  sword  of  God — "for  these  are  (read  hema)  sins  that 
will  be  avenged  by  the  sword."  The  objection  raised  against  v.  8b 
by  Marti  (op.  cit.,  ad  loc),  Duhm  (op.  ciL,  ad  loc),  and  Guthe  (in 
Kautzsch  2,  ad  loc.)  does  not  hold:  "It  will  flee  from  the  sword"  is  in 
reality  a  variation  of  the  statement,  "it  will  fall  by  the  sword,"  for  it 
means,  it  will  be  completely  put  to  rout;  no  matter  how  crushing  the 
defeat,  an  army  is  never  destroyed  to  the  last  man. 


ISAIAH  /VXD  POLITICAL  AFF.URS  285 

here  Jeremiah  taunts  the  people  for  their  futile  defence 
of  the  city  (during  the  last  stage  of  the  siege  of  Jeru- 
salem by  the  Chaldaeans)  declaring  that  their  doom  is 
sealed,  yet  he  takes  occasion  to  point  out  by  what 
course  they  might  even  yet  be  saved,  if  tliey  would 
{cf.  supra — pp.  6of.,  70). 

(C.)  X,  5-19.     god's  ultimate  reckoning  with  the  ASSYRIAN 
WORLD-POWER 

There  is  no  discrepancy,  either,  between  X,  5-19  and 
the  rest  of  Isaiah's  preaching.  Though  the  prophecy 
evidently  dates  from  a  time  when  Jerusalem  was 
threatened  by  Assyria  (see  v.  11),  and  for  this  reason, 
because  of  the  reference  to  the  conquest  of  Karkemish 
(717),  must  be  considered  a  product  of  the  year  711 
or,  what  is  more  likely,  of  the  year  701,  the  conviction 
expressed  in  it  might  have  found  utterance  at  any  time 
of  Isaiah's  ministry.  Isaiah  reviews  in  it  the  mighty 
conquests  of  Tiglath-Pileser  and  his  successors  in 
exactly  the  same  Hght  as  he  must  have  looked  upon 
Assyria's  imperialism  and  brutal  despotism  from  the 
ver}'-  first.  He  declares  that  Assyria  is  not  bent  upon 
destroying  Israel  because  it  feels  itself  the  rod  of 
God's  anger,  destined  for  that  purpose,  but  because  it 
is  filled  with  wanton  desire  for  conquest  and  unlimited 
power.  It  is  ready  to  trample  nations  under  foot,  to 
wipe  them  out  by  transplanting  the  people  from  tlieir 
native  soil  as  one  would  rob  a  bird's  nest,  and  it  gloats: 

"By  the  strength  of  my  hand  I  have  done  this, 
and  by  my  wisdom,  for  I  am  prudent." 

For  this  wicked  presumption,  Isaiah  asserts,  God  is  to 
mete  out  punishment  to  Assyria,  but,  it  is  important 
to  note,  he  makes  it  clear  that  God's  plan  to  punish 


286  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

Assyria  in  no  wise  interferes  with  His  intention  of 
first  using  this  nation  for  the  overthrow  of  His  people. 
In  V.  12  which,  for  reasons  that  must  be  considered 
altogether  arbitrary,  has  been  eliminated  by  recent 
exegetes  from  X,  5ff.,  Isaiah  states  expressly  that 
God  will  not  proceed  to  visit  pimishment  upon 
Assyria  until  "He  has  completed  His  whole  work  on 
Mt.  Zion  and  in  Jerusalem,"  that  is  to  say,  until  by 
the  destruction  of  Zion- Jerusalem,  in  addition  to  that 
of  Samaria  (which  has  already  been  effected),  He  has 
completed  His  work  of  destroying  His  people  through 
the  agency  of  Assyria  (c/.  vv.  5  and  6,  and  also  the 
similar  meaning  of  ?na"^sehil  in  Chap.  V,  19).  As 
to  the  authenticity  of  v.  12,  it  must  be  pointed  out 
that  the  verse  by  no  means  forms  a  break  in  the 
sequence  of  thought.  The  theme  of  the  prophecy, 
Assyria's  lust  of  dominion  and  its  inevitable  conse- 
quences, is  developed  in  two  well-rounded  parts: 
vv.  5-12,  and  13-19.  The  first  part  sets  forth  that 
Assyria,  not  realizing  that  it  is  merely  the  tool  in 
God's  hand,  has  set  its  heart  on  conquest,  and  that 
for  this  reason  God  shall  hold  a  reckoning  with 
Assyria  as  soon  as  its  commission  is  performed.  The 
second  part,  in  vv.  13-15,  expatiates  on  Assyria's 
policy  of  conquest  from  its  two  principal  aspects,  i.  e. 
from  the  aspect  of  Assyria's  insatiable  greed  for  do- 
minion, as  manifested  especially  in  its  brutal  disregard 
for  the  individuahties  of  nations,  and  from  the  aspect 
of  its  inordinate  presumption  bordering  on  self- 
deification.  The  concluding  verses  of  the  second  part, 
16-19,  give  a  more  complete  description  of  the  fate 
awaiting  Assyria:  the  collapse  of  Assyria  as  a  world- 
power  is  sure  to  come,  and  the  conflagration,  which  is 
to  sweep  away  the  vast,  proud  realm  it  has  built  up, 


IS.\IAH  .\ND  POLITICAL  AFFAIRS  287 

will  be  fanned  by  "the  Light  and  the  Holy  One  of 
Israel"  Himself.  Further,  since  v.  12  is  thus  an 
integral  part  of  X,  5-19  and  its  explanation  clearly 
indicated  by  the  general  trend  of  thought,  which  is 
perfectly  lucid,  it  follows  that  the  eschatological 
interpretation  of  the  verse,  which  has  come  into  vogue 
of  recent  years,  is  unwarranted.  Finally,  though  it 
must  be  granted  that  some  parts  of  vv.  5-19  read  more 
smootlily  than  v.  12,  others,  both  from  the  point  of 
view  of  diction  and  of  rhythm,  are  quite  on  a  level 
with  it;  ^  cf.  e.  g.  vv.  10  and  i4a-b.  As  to  "the  King 
of  Assyria,"  this  does  not  indicate  any  change  of  sub- 
ject, for  throughout  this  prophecy  Isaiah  addresses 
himself  actually  to  the  absolute  ruler  of  Assyria,  in 
whose  person  ail  power  of  the  state  is  centered.  In 
fact,  I  can  find  no  disparity  anywhere  in  X,  5-19; 
the  figures  are  adequate  throughout,  and  the  whole  is 
Isaianic  both  in  spirit  and  in  language. 

7.    ISAL\h'S   last  prophecy — CIL\PTER  XXII,    I-14 

Chapter  XXII,  1-14  may  be  referred  to  as  a  final 
proof  that  Isaiah  at  no  time  during  the  crisis  of  the 
year  701  predicted  the  deliverance  of  Judah  and 
Jerusalem  from  Assyria  by  the  intervention  of  Yiiwii. 
The  piece  is  to  be  considered  as  one  whole,  as  Hack- 
mann  -  and  Dillmann-Kittel  ^  take  it,  with  the  excep- 
tion, however,  of  v.  6. 

*  To  the  genitive-construction,  peri  godael  I'bhabh  madaekh  'aiiur, 
which  Duhm  calls  an  "Ungetum,  das  trcfUich  in  die  Grammatikcn 
passt,  aber  nicht  in  cine  bcschwingtc  I'rophctenredc,"  (op.  cit.,  ad 
he.)  cf.  the  similar  construction,  ''^(acraclh  gcuth  iikkore  'cphraim, 
XXVni,  I  and  3,  of  a  passage  which  is  unquestionably  genuine  and 
even  forcible. 

^Op.  cit.,  pp.  92-97. 

*  Op.  cit.,  ad  loc. 


288  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

This  verse  belongs  in  the  pse-udo-prophecy,  XXI, 
i-io/  from  which  being  omitted  it  was  added  in 
the  margin,  and  when  the  MS.  was  subsequently 
recopied  it  became  wrongly  inserted  in  Chap.  XXII. 
The  original  place  of  the  verse,  or  more  correctly  of 
uf'elam  nasd  'as pa  w^qir  'era  mageji,  was  after  bd 
raekhaebh  'is  saemaed  parasim  of  XXI,  9,  as  is  shown 
by  D-'K'is  DnwS  nann  of  XXII,  6;  the  latter  words  are 
practically  identical  with  ha  raekhaebh'is  (saemaed) 
parasim:  3  is  not  the  preposition  2,  as  in  our  present 
text,  but  X3  written  without  the  vowel-letter,  like 
ri3^n>l  (K),  II  Ki.  Ill,  24,  and  ^n,  I  Sam.  XXV,  8; 
'adam  is  a  variant  of  'is.  As  to  saemaed,  from  the  fact 
that  it  is  missing  in  XXII,  6  it  is  safe  to  conclude 
that  it  did  not  stand  originally  in  XXI,  9  either,  but 
that  it  got  in  here  by  mistake  from  v.  7.  This  re- 
moves the  difficulty  presented  by  the  strange  use  of 
saemaed  in  reference  to  persons.^  n^'^^nSi  mx  33"i2  then 
are  the  words  which  immediately  preceded  the 
omitted  passage,  and  which  were  repeated  in  the 
margin  alongside  of  the  passage  in  order  to  indicate 
the  place  where  it  belonged.^ 

^  Like  Jer.  L-LI,  Is.  XXI,  i-io  belongs  in  the  category  of  vaticinia 
post  evcntiim:  what  purports  to  be  a  prediction  of  the  imminent  fall  of 
Babylon  proves  on  closer  examination  to  have  been  written  after  the 
conquest  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus. 

2  In  V.  7  parasun  means  "horses,"  while  here  in  v.  9  it  can  only 
mean  "horsemen,"  being  in  apposition  with  raekhaebh  'is. 

'That  h{d)  raekhaebh  'adam  parasun  was  put  between  the  two 

omitted  hemistichs  when  the  latter  were  inserted  in  XXII,  6  may 

easily  be  explained.    In  order  to  keep  the  omitted  passage  separate 

from  the  words  indicating  the  place  where  it  belonged,  the  copyist's 

method  in  putting  down  both  in  the  margin,  whether  at  the  top  or  at 

the  bottom  of  the  page,  may  have  been  as  follows: 

,.-s         I.     I.;    I  J         A      —      -uo^'elam  nasd  'aspd 
bya)  raekaebh    adani  parasim  ,  ^       or 

wegir    erd  magen; 


ISAIAH  AND  POLITICAL  AFFAIRS  2S9 

The  prophecy,  XXII.  1-14,  describes  in  opening 
how  the  people  are  given  up  to  revelry  because  of 
their  joy  over  the  propitious  turn  afTairs  have  taken. 
Though  the  particular  alTairs  alluded  to  are  not 
specified  at  this  juncture,  it  is  at  once  apparent  that 
the  joy  and  excitement  of  the  people  must  be  due 
citlier  to  the  sudden  termination  of  the  war  which 
has  been  carried  on  in  the  country  or  to  some  un- 
expected success  in  the  same.  For  the  prophet  con- 
tinues, "Thy  slain  are  not  those  that  have  been  killed 
by  the  sword,  not  tliose  that  have  fallen  in  battle," 
but  (this  follows  by  implication)  they  are  this  light- 
hearted  people — stricken  though  not  by  sword  thrust — 
this  people  bhnd  to  the  real  issue  of  affairs,  and  heed- 
less of  the  day  of  terror  and  destruction  so  near  at 
hand: 

"For  a  day  of  panic,  of  treading-down  and  confusion 
hath  in  readiness  the  Lord,  God  Sabaoth — 
In  the  vale  of  vision  the  walls  are  bursting, 
and  cries  resound  to  the  mountains." 

There  has  been  much  speculation  about  "the  vale" 
or  "valley  of  vision,"  and  various,  necessarily  un- 
successful attempts  have  been  made  both  to  explain 
the  name  and  to  locate  the  valley.  As  soon,  however, 
as  the  expression  is  taken  as  a  poetic  figure,  its  mean- 
ing is  self-evident.  The  people  are  rejoicing  blindly, 
because,  according  to  superficial  indications,  they  have 
reason  to  be  confident  of  the  future,  but  to  the  prophet's 

vfelamnasd'aipd  ^(^.^  ^^^^^^^  ,^^^  ^^^^j.,,, 

weqir    era  nuigcn 
And  since  the  copyists  of  later  times  no  longer  understood  the  method 
pursued  by  the  earlier  coypists  in  cases  of  omission,  it  is  but  natural 
that  they  inserted  the  whole  mechanically  as  they  found  it.    There 
are  other  cases  in  support  of  this  explanation. 


290  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

vision  the  reality  is  revealed — the  destruction,  in  all  its 
harrowing  details,  that  is  in  store  for  them. 

In  verses  yff.  the  prophet  continues  by  stating  the 
reasons  for  his  gloomy  outlook,  and,  though  at  the 
beginning  of  this  part  something  must  have  dropped 
out,^  there  can  still  be  no  doubt  about  this  part's 
being  the  continuation  of  vv.  1-5  inasmuch  as  it  sup- 
plements them  in  two  essential  respects.  Not  only  does 
it  deal  explicitly  with  the  happenings  which  have  led 
to  the  prophet's  forecast  of  doom,  but  it  gives  a  clear 
idea  of  the  particular  peril  the  removal  of  which 
caused  such  exultation  among  the  people.  We  learn 
that  Jerusalem  itself  was  in  immediate  danger;  and 
the  detailed  description  of  the  measures  adopted  by 
the  people  in  that  crisis  is  identical  with  the  account 
in  II  Chron.  XXXII,  2-5,  30  of  the  precautions  taken 
by  Hezekiah  in  the  year  701,  when  Jerusalem  was 
blockaded  by  a  detachment  of  Sennacherib's  army. 
Contrary  to  the  opinion  of  Duhm,^  Marti,^  and  others, 
there  is  no  ground  for  eliminating  vv.  Qb-iia  as  not 
being  an  original  part  of  the  prophecy.  The  difference 
in  diction  between  these  verses  and  the  rest  of  the 
prophecy  is  owing  to  the  circumstance  that  the 
prophet  refers  in  them  to  plain  prosaic  facts,  which 
it  would  be  stilted  to  clothe  in  any  but  matter-of-fact 
language.  It  is  thus  clear  that  the  jubilation  of  the 
people,  described  in  the  opening  of  the  prophecy,  was 
caused  by  the  sudden  raise  of  the  blockade  and  the 
departure  of  the  Assyrians,  which  occurrence,  as  most 

^  The  insertion  of  v.  6  here  may  well  have  been  due  to  a  gap  in  the 
text  caused  by  the  effacement  of  some  lines  or  by  some  other  accident 
to  the  text. 

^Op.cU.,adloc. 

^Op.cit.,adloc. 


ISMAH  .\ND  POLITIC.\L  AFFAIRS  291 

scholars  agree,  is  the  only  possible  date  of  the  proph- 
ecy. 

Considering  the  havoc  that  had  been  wrought  by 
the  Assyrian  invasion,  and  the  seriousness  of  the 
situation  when  Jerusalem  itself  was  blockaded,  we 
cannot  wonder  that  the  people's  Joy  knew  no  bounds 
when  all  of  a  sudden  the  blockading  force  was  with- 
drawn, and  the  Assyrian  armies  left  the  country. 
Nor  can  we  wonder  that,  in  their  anxiety  when  the 
Assyrian  armies  were  advancing  to  besiege  the  capital, 
Hezekiah  and  the  people  overhauled  the  fortifications 
and  provided  for  an  adequate  water-supply.  But 
Isaiah  saw  things  in  a  different  light!  He  could  sec 
nothing  but  rank  apostasy  in  either  action.  According 
to  his  belief  the  people  should  not  have  sought  to  de- 
fend the  city  against  the  enemy,  but  should  have 
turned  to  God  for  dehverance,  should  have  trusted 
their  case  entirely  to  Him.  From  the  great  peril  which 
threatened  them,  he  declares,  they  should  have  com- 
prehended God's  ''long-formed  plan"  toward  tliem, 
and  should  have  returned  penitently  to  God,  as  he  had 
admonished  them  to  do  (in  XXXI,  5-9).  But  they 
have  remained  blind  throughout,  and  this  feasting  in 
which  they  now  indulge  because  of  their  deliverance, 
and  by  which  they  frivolously  extol  the  principle  of 
enjoying  life  while  it  lasts,'  but  shows  the  extent  of 

'  Similar  parallels  to  the  carpe  diem  of  Horace  are  found  in  both  the 
ancient  Egyptian  and  ancient  Babylonian  literature.  In  a  frequently 
quoted  product  of  the  former  it  is  said:  "Enjoy  the  glad  day  and 
think  of  joy  ere  the  day  comes  when  you  journey  to  the  land  that 
loves  silence,"  and  in  a  product  of  the  latter:  "When  the  Gofls  created 
man,  they  ordained  death  for  man,  but  life  they  took  for  themselves — • 
thou,  O  Gilgamesh,  glut  thyself,  seek  joy  day  and  night,  feast  day 
after  day,  dance  (?)  and  be  merr>'  (?)  day  and  night"  (r/.  Erman, 
"Acg>ptcn  and  Acgyptiscbcs  Lcbcn,"  p.  320;  "  Das  GiJgamcsh-Epos " 


292  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

their  callousness.  Therefore,  the  prophet  concludes, 
their  doom  is  sealed. 

The  evidence  furnished  by  XXII,  1-14  confirmatory 
of  what  we  have  sho\vn  to  have  been  Isaiah's  attitude 
in  the  crisis  of  the  year  701  could  not  be  more  conclu- 
sive. It  precludes,  in  fact,  any  other  explanation.  For 
it  is  not  conceivable  that  if  Isaiah,  as  many  scholars 
think,  really  believed  that  Assyria  by  its  attack  on 
Jerusalem  proved  itself  the  enemy  of  Yh\vh  (be- 
cause, they  argue,  for  the  prophet  Zion  was  the  in- 
violable abode  of  Yhwh),  and  if  the  more  desperate 
the  situation  grew,  the  more  confident  he  became 
of  the  ultimate  triumph  of  Yh^\'h's  cause,  and, 
moreover,  if  he  even  predicted  the  exact  outcome  of 
events,  as  the  story  II  ICi.  XIX,  5-7  (  =  Is.  XXXVII, 
5-7)  claims  he  did,  then  certainly  it  is  not  conceivable 
that,  just  as  soon  as  everything  had  turned  out 
according  to  his  prediction,  he  would  deliver  such  a 
prophecy  as  XXII,  1-14.  It  is  much  more  likely  that 
he  would  rather  have  pointed  triumphantly  to  the 
glorious  vindication  of  his  faith,  that  he  would  have 
joined  in  the  general  rejoicing  over  Jerusalem's 
deliverance,  and  exulted  in  the  fact  that  Yuwii  had 
proved   Himself  more  victorious  than   ever  before. 

Isaiah's  prediction  of  doom,  however,  though  to  the 
crowd  rejoicing  over  their  deliverance  it  must,  in  its 
untimeliness,  have  fallen  like  a  thunderbolt  from  a 
clear  sky,  is  not  more  significant  than  his  scathing 
and  equally  untimely  review  of  Hezekiah's  and  the 
people's  preparations  for  the  defence  of  Jerusalem. 
In  branding  as  impious  their  various  precautions, 
notably  their  providing  for  a  water-supply  suf&cient 

in  Gressmann,  "Altorientalische  Texte  und  Bilder,"  I,  p.  49;  and 
Marti,  op.  cit.,  ad  loc,  and  Gray,  op.  cit.,  ad  loc). 


ISAIAH  AND  POLITICAL  AFFAIRS  203 

to  meet  the  demands  of  the  siege,  he  clearly  showed 
tliat  he  stood  quite  as  aloof  from  political  life  at  the 
close  of  his  ministry  ^  as  he  did  when  starting  out  on 
the  same.  In  this  retrospect,  just  as  in  VII,  4  and  9 
(of  the  time  of  the  Syro-Ephraimitic  campaign)  and 
in  XXX,  I5f.  (704-702),  Isiiiah  viewed  the  situation 
purely  from  a  spiritual  standpoint:  the  impending 
judgment,  he  declared,  might  have  been  warded 
off  in  one  way  only — had  the  people  in  the  crisis 
from  which  they  have  just  escaped  proved  implicit 
faith  in  God  by  abandoning  all  efforts  at  self-defence. 

Resume 
It  is  evident  from  our  examination  of  Isaiah's 
prophecies  in  general  and  from  the  analvsis  of  X,  5-^, 
XIV,  24-27,  2S-32,  XVII,  12-XVIII,  6.  XXIX,  sa-b, 
7-8,  XXXI,  5-9,  and  XXII,  1-14  that  Isaiah  at  no 
time  of  his  preaching  confessed  allegiance  to  the  popu- 
lar belief,  that  Zion  was  the  inviolable  abode  of  Yh\mi, 
and,  what  follows  from  this,  that  Assyria's  wanton 
attack  on  Jerusalem  would  have  to  be  frustrated  by 
Yhwh's  o\mi  intervention.  On  the  contrary,  it  is 
clear  that  in  XXIX,  ifT.,  as  briefly  indicated  above,'  he 
predicted  the  destruction  of  Zion  and  its  Temple  no 
less  categorically  than  his  contemporary  Micah  had 
done  some  time  before,  or  than  Jeremiah  did  almost  a 
centur}-  later,  and  that  in  addition  to  this,  he  assiiiled 
the  people's  belief  in  the  sanctity  of  Zion  and  the 
efi'iaicy  of  the  sacrificial  cult  with  no  less  sen  thing 
sarcasm  than  Amos,  when  by  his  vision,  Am.  IX,  ilT., 
he  attacked  their  belief  in  the  sanctity  of  Beth-El. 

•  There  is  no  evidence  of  Isaiah's  activity  after  he  delivered  this 
sermon.  Whether  the  coincidence  is  significant  or  purely  accidental  is 
a  {x>int  which  there  is  no  means  of  deciding. 

*  See  pp.  aSof. 


294  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

To  the  festive  crowd  assembled  with  sacrifices  and 
gifts  for  worship  before  Yhwh's  altar  at  Zion  Isaiah 
declares  that  within  a  year's  time  God  Himself 
will  take  the  field  against  His  "  altar-hearth  "-city — 
''then  there  will  be  wailing  and  moaning,"  and  then 
Jerusalem  will  be  to  Him  "a  real  altar-hearth  " — that 
is  to  say  when  the  streets  of  Jerusalem  reek  with  the 
blood  of  its  slaughtered  citizens  as  the  altar-hearth 
now  flows  with  the  blood  of  sacrifices.  No  less  pointed 
is  his  reference  to  Zion  in  vv.  i  and  3  ^  as  "  the  city 
against  which  David  encamped,"  by  which  the 
prophet  means  to  emphasize  that  in  Yhwh's  eyes 
Jerusalem  with  its  altar-hearth  dedicated  to  Yhwh  is 
quite  as  truly  a  Kanaanitish-pagan  city  as  it  was  when 
David  encamped  against  it.  The  view,  therefore,  that 
Isaiah  upheld  the  belief  in  the  inviolable  sanctity  of 
Jerusalem,  or,  as  it  is  even  generally  expressed,  that  it 
was  he  who  originated  this  behef,  should  no  longer 
have  a  place  in  critical  works  on  Israeli tish  Prophecy, 
but  should  be  relegated  to  the  realm  of  myths,  where 
it  belongs.^ 

In  the  same  realm  belongs  the  widely  prevailing 

^  Instead  of  the  Masoretic  kedur  read,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX 
and  V.  I,  as  most  exegetes  do,  kedavid. 

2  In  XXVIII,  16,  as  has  been  repeatedly  pointed  out  by  recent 
exegetes,  no  allusion  whatever  is  contained  to  the  inviolability  of 
Zion  or  its  Temple.  By  the  second  part  of  the  verse,  "He  who  hath 
faith  will  not  be  in  haste" — or  perhaps  "will  not  be  moved:"  Id 
jamus — Isaiah  made  it  perfectly  clear  that  by  "the  proven  stone,  the 
precious  corner-stone  laid  as  foundation  in  Zion"  by  God,  he  had 
reference  to  the  spiritual  community  of  the  faithful,  the  circle  of 
disciples  gathered  around  him,  and  of  which  he  said,  in  VIII,  16-18, 
that  in  them  all  his  hope  concerning  the  coming  of  God's  future 
dominion  was  centered.  The  verse  is  but  another  assertion  of  the 
basic,  guiding  principle  expounded  in  VII,  9,  and  emphasized  by 
Isaiah  on  all  occasions,  that  only  by  faith  in  God  can  man's  life  be 


IS-\I.\H  AND  POLITICAL  AFFAIRS 


295 


\new  that  Isaiah  succeeded  in  acquiring  great  political 
influence  and  a  commanding  position  in  the  state  under 
Hezekiah.  This  view,  as  frequently  pointed  out  in 
these  pages,  has  no  basis  in  Isaiah's  prophecies;  it 
rests  altogether  on  the  presentation  given  in  II  Ki. 
XIX-XX  (  =  Is.  XXXVII-XXXLX)  of  Isaiah's  re- 
lation to  Hezekiah  and  of  the  role  \Yhich  the  prophet 
played  in  the  events  of  the  year  701,  and  this  presenta- 
tion, as  the  majority  of  modem  scholars  agree,^  and 
as  even  Staerk  acknowledges,-  is  purely  legendary. 
It  has  its  origin  solely  in  the  fictitious  picture  formed 
by  later  ages  of  the  prophet  and  his  ministry,  and  has 
no  more  in  common  with  the  real  Isaiah  and  the  facts 
of  the  case  ^  than  the  picture  of  Jeremiah  in  the 
legendary  record  of  Zedekiah's  inter\'iew  with  Jere- 
miah and  in  the  legends  of  Zedekiah's  deputations  to 
Jeremiah  has  with  Jeremiah.'* 

The  real  relation  of  the  prophet  to  the  people  and 
the  government,  and  vice  versa,  as  revealed  in  his  proph- 
ecies, is  briefly  this: — on  the  one  hand  there  was  the 

placed  on  a  firm  foundation.  (C/.  Marti,  op.  cit.,  ad  loc,  Guthc  in 
KauLzsch',  ad  loc,  Staerk,  op.  cit.,  p.  72.) 

'  Cf.  Stade  in  Z.\T\V.,  VI  (1896),  pp.  i72ff.,  Cheyne,  op.  cit.,  212B., 
22iff.,  Mcinhold,  "Die  Jcsaiacrzahlungcn,  Jes.  36-39,"  Duhm. 
op.  cit.,  on  Chaps.  XXXVI-XXXIX,  Marli,  op.  cit.,  on  Chaps. 
XXX\I-XXXIX. 

'Op.  cit.,  pp.  8 if.,  140(1. 

*  If,  at  the  time  of  the  conquest  of  Asdod  (711)  by  Sargon's  com- 
mander-in-chief, Judah  escaped  unscathed  for  its  participation  in  the 
insurrection,  it  was  not  because  Hezekiah  in  the  eleventh  hour,  as  is 
generally  thought,  heeded  Isaiah's  advice,  but  because  in  all  prob- 
ability conditions  arose  similar  to  those  which  later  in  701  led  to  the 
sudden  raise  of  the  blockade  of  Jerusalem,  viz.,  certain  developments 
in  the  East  demanding  that  Sargon's  efforts  be  concentrated  in  that 
direction. 

*  Sec  supra,  pp.  56fl.,  67(1.,  78f. 


296  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

prophet  viewing  every  contingency  from  his  lofty, 
ideal  pedestal,  warning  the  people  in  all  critical  situa- 
tions not  to  rely  on  human  precautions  or  material 
defence,  but  to  seek  safety  by  resting  their  case  with 
God;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  there  were  the  King 
and  the  people,  heedless  of  the  prophet's  words,  in- 
capable of  grasping  their  significance,  laughing  at  the 
strange  visionary  who  proposed  in  all  seriousness  that 
they  abandon  their  efforts  at  self-defence,  and  so 
meet  their  fate,  as  it  seemed  to  them,  with  folded 
arms.  We  cannot  wonder  at  this  attitude  of  his 
contemporaries,  for  to  enter  into  Isaiah's  proposals,  to 
submit  to  his  guidance,  would  have  meant  for  the 
people  to  rise  to  the  spiritual  heights  attained  by  the 
prophet,  and  this  would  have  been  nothing  short  of 
the  realization  of  God's  dominion  then  and  there. 
Isaiah  himself  understood  this  perfectly,  and  so  he 
never  failed  to  make  it  clear  that  it  was  to  the  future 
that  he  looked  for  the  recognition  of  the  truth  which  he 
was  preaching;  as  to  the  people  of  his  own  age,  he 
knew  that  for  them  his  words  were  bound  to  be  fruit- 
less— -meaningless  even,  since  their  sole  conception  of 
the  worship  of  Yhwh  was  the  ritual  minutely  pre- 
scribed and  punctiliously  carried  out,  just  as  their 
whole  notion  of  Yhwh's  holiness  was  a  purely  ritu- 
alistic one.  Of  the  holiness  of  God  as  Isaiah  under- 
stood it,  that  holiness  that  makes  purity  of  heart  and 
righteous  conduct  imperative  on  man,  they  had  no 
conception.  And  we  can  easily  understand  that  they 
heaped  derision  and  invective  on  the  prophet  who 
importuned  them  with  "the  Holy  One  of  Israel"  and 
His  requirements  of  man  (c/.  XXIX,  9-14,  XXX,  9-12 
also  I,  10-18).'^ 

^  It  follows  from  Isaiah's  sweeping  condemnation  of  the  Yhwh 


MIC.\H'S  VIEW  OF  THE  DOOM 


micah's  view  of  the  doom 


?97 


In  the  case  of  Isaiah's  younger  contemporary, 
Micah,  no  detailed  examination  of  his  prophecies  is 
required  for  our  puqwse,  for  botli  those  who  ascribe 
only  Chaps.  I-IIIof  the  Book  of  Micah  to  Micah,  and 
those  who  rightly  hold  that  certain  parts  of  Chaps.  IV- 
\'II  are  his  work  also,  are  agreed  tliat  he  sjicaks  of  the 
doom  in  the  most  absolute  terms  throughout  his 
prophecies,  and  that  it  is  quite  apparent  tliat  he  en- 
tertained absolutely  no  hope  tliat  his  contemporaries 
might  be  alTected  by  his  preaching.  Since  these  so 
utterly  failed  to  realize  "what  God  demands  of  man," 
that  they  believed  their  lives  to  be  centered  in  God 
even  though  their  commonwealth  was  built  up  on 
crime  and  wrong,  he  could  see  only  certain  destruction 
in  store  for  them.  Accordingly  he  started,  some  short 
time  prior  to  the  conquest  of  Samaria,  to  predict 
that  Samaria  and  Jerusalem  alike  would  be  completely 
destroyed,  and  after  the  fall  of  the  sister-kingdom,  he 
in  more  sweeping  terms  than  ever  reiterated  his 
prediction  of  the  complete  overthrow  of  his  home- 
state.  Whatever  Micah's  hope  for  the  future  may 
have  been  in  detail,  it  is  certain  that  for  him  the 
future,  ideal  Israel  would  have  to  be  built  up  on  the 
ruins  of  the  present,  that  it  would  have  to  be  looked 
for  only  after  the  complete  destruction  of  nation  and 
country. 

cult  of  his  time  that,  even  if  the  report,  II  Ki.  XVIII,  4,  alx)ut 
Ilezekiah's  reform  were  authentic,  Isaiah  would  have  been  as  indiflcr- 
cnt  to  such  a  reform  as  Jeremiah  was  btcr  to  the  Deuteronomic 
reformation. 

The  detailed  discussion  of  Jeremiah's  attitude  to  ihc  Deuteronomic 
reformation  will  have  a  place  in  Volume  II. 


BOOK  II 

THE  MESSAGE  OF  THE  PROPHETS 

PART  I 


AMOS 

JUSTICE  AND  RIGHTEOUSNESS 

SPIRITUAL  RELIGION  VERSUS  RITUAL- 
ISTIC PIETY 

INTRODUCTORY 

The  two  sides  from  which  we  have  undertaken  to 
present  Hterary  prophecy,  the  spiritual  and  the  in- 
tellectual, are,  by  the  nature  of  the  case,  bound  to 
overlap,  just  as  in  an  analytic  study  of  the  human 
mind  the  various  functions  of  mind  and  spheres  of 
mental  activity  invariably  encroach  on  one  another, 
and  resist  every  attempt  at  absolute  demarcation. 
In  analysing  the  Faith  of  the  Prophets,  therefore,  we 
have  been  obliged  to  make  frequent  reference  to  their 
Message;  but,  however  frequent  or  extensive  these 
references  have  been,  they  have  not  commanded  at- 
tention as  illustrating  the  prophets'  religious  views, 
but  only  as  elucidating  their  religious  experience. 
Their  religious  views  have  been  taken  up  only  in  so 
far  as  they  serve  to  throw  lighten  the  personal  faith 
of  the  prophets,  and  to  afford  us  an  insight  into  the 
source  of  that  wonderful  idealism  which  filled  the 
prophets  with  visions  of  spiritual  regeneration  and 
universal  righteousness  at  the  very  time  when  everj- 
thing  pointed  to  corruption  and  decay. 

In  Book  II  we  shall  consider  the  religious  views  of 
the  prophets  per  se.  We  shall  seek  to  trace  them 
through  the  successive  stages  of  their  growth  and 
301 


30  2  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

development,  and  to  define  as  nearly  as  possible  the 
contribution  of  each  of  the  great  prophets  to  the 
progress  of  religious  thought.  Our  point  of  departure 
for  the  Message  of  the  Prophets,  therefore,  will  be 
Amos — on  whom,  accordingly,  our  attention  to  a  large 
extent  will  be  centered  in  Part  I.  It  will  be  interesting 
to  note  in  this  survey,  how  from  the  very  first  the 
basic  and  distinctive  features  of  the  prophetic  reHgion 
were  clearly  and  forcibly  set  forth. 

I.   AMOS.     JUSTICE  AND   RIGHTEOUSNESS 

In  personality  and  temperament,  Amos  presents  a 
striking  contrast  to  Jeremiah.  Not  less  great,  per- 
haps, is  he,  not  less  fervid  and  sincere,  but  full  of 
wrath  and  fire  and  thunder — austere  and  pitiless  he 
seems,  when  compared  with  the  tender,  emotional 
Jeremiah. 

A  humble  shepherd,  tending  his  flocks  on  the 
hillsides  of  Tekoa,  Amos  felt  the  divine  call:  "God 
called  me  away  from  my  flocks,  bidding  me,  Go, 
prophesy  against  my  people  Israel."  And  even  as 
Jeremiah,  a  century  and  a  half  later,  Amos  left  every- 
thing and  dedicated  himself  to  the  service  of  his  God. 

But  while  Jeremiah,  as  we  know,  was  oppressed 
with  grief  at  the  knowledge  of  his  people's  sinfulness, 
Amos'  soul  was  filled  with  wrath.  Fiercely  he  de- 
nounces his  countrymen  for  their  iniquities,  mercilessly 
he  scores  the  high  and  mighty  for  their  pride,  for  their 
cowardly  oppression  of  the  poor,  their  gross  pleasure 
in  things  material,  their  venal  greed;  and  again  and 
again  he  thunders  forth  the  warning  of  their  doom — 
complete,  irrevocable. 

Throughout  the  prophetic  utterances  of  Jeremiah 
we  noticed  a  definite  hope — his  boundless  confidence 


AMOS 


303 


in  God's  mercy,  his  sublime  trust  that  he  was  sow- 
ing the  seed,  Uie  harvest  of  which  would  be  reaped  in 
some  future  age. 

In  Amos'  prophecies  there  is  no  clear  assurance  of 
pardon  or  mercy  or  hope,  only  stern,  uncompromising 
justice.  Only  in  one  passage  is  there  anything  that 
might  be  construed  as  a  gleam  of  hope,  and  here  it  is 
not  expressed  outright,  but  suggested  by  the  general 
tone  of  the  passage: 

"Days  shall  come,  saith  the' Lord, 

when  I  will  send  famine  in  the  land, 

not  famine  of  bread  nor  drought  of  water, 

but  of  hearing  the  word  of  God. 

They  shall  wander  from  sea  to  sea, 

from  the  north  even  to  the  sunrise  they  shall  roam 

to  lind  the  word  of  God, 

but  shall  not  find  it."    (VIII,  11-12). 

It  is  not  unlikely  that  this  passage,  as  we  have  it,  is 
incomplete,  and  that  the  part  which  we  have  not, 
contained  positive  reasoning  to  the  efTect  that  light 
might  ultimately  dawn  for  tlie  benighted  wanderers. 
At  least,  similar  passages  in  other  prophets  cannot  be 
taken  as  implying  that  the  spiritual  darkness  described 
will  be  final  and  permanent.^  But  we  have  to  reckon 
with  the  passage  as  it  is,  and  so  are  not  justified  in 
noting  anything  more  than  tlie  incomplete  suggestion 
of  a  hope. 

The  predominating  features  in  Amos'  writings  are, 
on  the  one  hand,  his  denunciation  of  the  shameless 
luxury  and  injustice  that  prevailed  in  his  age,  and,  on 
the  other,  his  clamor  for  righteous  government  and 
for  a  pure,  moral  life.    It  is  a  mistake  to  conclude,  as  is 

'  See  supra,  pp.  ii^i. 


304  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

commonly  done,  that  Amos  lacked  in  patriotism  and 
in  sympathy  toward  his  countrymen.  Austere  and 
uncompromising  he  was,  without  a  doubt,  but  not 
indifferent.  He  does  not  give  utterance  to  his  feelings 
like  Hosea,  or  Jeremiah  or  Isaiah;  but  his  dirges  and 
his  various  descriptions  of  the  judgment  reveal  true 
depth  of  feehng  and  show  that,  even  as  the  other 
prophets,  so  was  he  shaken  and  haunted  by  the 
thought  of  his  people's  doom. 

It  was  during  the  great  fall-festival  that  Amos  made 
his  appearance  at  Beth-El,  that  most  famous  sanc- 
tuary of  the  Northern  Kingdom.  From  all  over  the 
country  the  people  had  assembled,  as  was  their  cus- 
tom, with  tithes  and  sacrifices  to  offer  thanksgiving  to 
God  for  a  bountiful  harvest  and  to  give  themselves 
up  to  rejoicing. 

At  that  period  of  their  history,  especially,  the 
IsraeUtes  believed  that  they  had  cause  to  rejoice  and 
celebrate  thanksgiving,  for,  owing  to  the  military 
successes  of  Jeroboam  II,  the  country  was  enjoying  a 
sudden  influx  of  prosperity.  And,  indeed,  we  know 
from  the  writings  of  the  contemporary  prophets  that 
the  feasting  and  mirth  at  these  festivals  celebrated 
in  honor  of  Yhwh,  were  carried  beyond  all  bounds, 
so  that  the  whole  celebration  had  come  to  bear  a 
worldly  rather  than  a  religious  aspect.^ 

What  a  contrast  is  presented  by  this  rejoicing  multi- 
tude and  the  austere  prophet  who  suddenly  appears 
in  their  midst  predicting  doom: 

"Hear  this  word  which  I  recite  as  dirge  over  you, 

House  of  Israel: 
Fallen  is  the  virgin  Israel — 

1  Cf.  especiaUy  Is.  XXVIII,  jL 


AMOS  30s 

powerless  to  rise  again. 
Prostrated  to  the  ground — 
no  one  to  lift  her  up  "  (V,  1-2). 

But  more  significant  still  arc  the  prophet's  opening 
words: 

'Yhwh   shall   storm   from   Zion   and    thunder  from 

Jerusalem, 
and  the  pastures  of  the  shepherds  shall  mourn, 
and  the  summit  of  Karmel  shall  wither  " — 

that  is  to  say,  it  is  Yhwh  Himself  who  will  rise  and 
destroy  the  whole  countr}^  from  the  pasture-lands  in 
the  extreme  south  to  the  summit  of  i\It.  Karmel  in  the 
north. 

This  prophec}'  of  Amos  fell  on  deaf  ears.  That  his 
compatriots  failed  to  grasp  the  significance  of  these 
startling  words  is  to  be  explained  by  the  radical 
difference  in  religious  views  which  separated  prophet 
and  people.  This  difference  was  twofold,  pertaining 
(i)  to  the  relation  between  Israel  and  Yhwh,  and 
(2)  to  the  importance  that  should  be  attached  to  the 
cult  and  ritual. 

For  Amos'  Israelitish  contemporaries  Yhwh  was 
Israel's  God  and  Israel  was  Yhwh's  people.  Yhwh 
Himself,  they  believed,  had  created  this  relationship 
by  delivering  them  out  of  Egypt.  How  could  it  be 
possible,  therefore,  that  Yhwh  would  destroy  His 
own  people?  Nay,  more  than  this,  they  argued,  in 
granting  them  victor>'  and  protection  Yhwh  was  I 
but  upholding  His  own  interests,  for  only  in  Israeli 
was  He  worshipped,  only  there  did  He  have  His^ 
dwelling  and  His  shrines.  This  popular  view  of  the 
reciprocal  relationship  between  Israel  and  Yuwii  is 


if 


306  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

reflected  throughout  the  literature  prior  to  Amos' 
appearance.  Thus,  e.  g.,  in  the  song  of  Deborah, 
which  celebrates  Deborah's  victory  over  Sisera,  we 
read:  "Curse  Meroz,  saith  the  Angel  of  Yh^vh,  curse 
her  inhabitants  bitterly,  because  they  came  not  to  the 
aid  of  Yhwh,  to  the  aid  of  Yhwh  among  the 
heroes!"  Qudg.  V,  23).  And  in  the  EHsha-story,  a 
story  dating  from  Amos'  own  times,  where  it  is  related 
how  EKsha  on  his  death-bed  prophesied  to  Joash  that 
he  would  vanquish  Aram,  Elisha  calls  Joash 's  prospec- 
tive victory  over  Aram,  or,  as  he  puts  it,  "Joash's 
victorious  arrow  against  Aram,"  "an  arrow  of  victory 
for  Ynmi  "  (II  Ki.  XIIL  14-19). 

In  accordance  with  this  view,  Amos'  contempo- 
raries reasoned  that  it  would  be  absurd  to  think  of 
Yhwh  without  Israel,  for  what  could  Yh"\\th  do, 
how  could  He  be  glorified  without  His  people?  What 
would  become  of  His  dominion  if  Israel  were  to  per- 
ish?— Such  were  the  tacit  questions  with  which  the 
IsraeHtes  at  Beth-El  ridiculed  the  prophet's  fore- 
boding of  evil. 

But  in  contrast  to  their  belief  that  Yhwh's  and 
Israel's  interests  were  identical,  Amos  declares  signif- 
icantly: 

"Verily  ye  are  not  better  to  me,  Israelites, 
1  than   the  Kushites   {i.  e.   the  despised  negro-race), 
saith  Yhwh. 
I  did  indeed  lead  forth  the  Israelites  from  Egypt, 
but  I  also  led  forth   the  Philistines  from  Kaphtor 
and  the  Aramaeans  from  Kir  "    (Am.  IX,  7) . 

Thus  Amos  denies  emphatically  that  Israel  enjoys  a 
special  monopoly  of  God's  favor,  and  in  contrast  to 
the  popular  conception  of  Yh\mi  as  the  national  God 


AMOS 


307 


of  Israel,  he  sets  up  the  idea  of  a  universal  God.  who 
controls  the  destinies  of  all  men,  and  to  whom  all  the 
world  must  do  homage. 

This  universal  God,  it  is  important  to  note,  is  for 
Amos,  as,  in  fact,  for  all  the  prophets,  a  God  of 
eternal  righteousness,  a  supreme  moral  being,  whose 
will  it  is  that  right  and  justice  shall  triumph  through- 
out the  world,  and  who,  accordingly,  punishes  sin  and 
injustice  wherever  he  finds  it,  without  regard  to  who 
is  responsible  for  it,  or  who  suffers  by  it. 

It  has  a  special  significance,  therefore,  that  Amos 
opens  his  prophecies  (Chaps.  I,  2-II)  by  representing 
Yhwh  in  judgment  over  Israel  and  the  Kanaanitish  na- 
tions alike,  and,  %vhat  is  more  important,  in  judgment 
over  them,  not  because  of  ritual  sins  or  heathen 
ignorance  of  ritual  observ^ances,  as  the  case  may  be. 
but  because  they  have  sho\vn  no  regard  for  the 
universal  laws  of  morality. 

By  his  novel  conception  of  God  Amos  represents 
Israel's  deliverance  from  Eg^pt  in  an  altogether  new 
light.    Yhwii,  as  God  of  universal  justice,  delivered  the 
Israelites  from  Eg\pt,  not  because  they  were  Israelites,   , 
but  because  they  were  held  in  unjust  bondage.  ' 

This  act  of  special  favor,  they  should  understand, 
did  not  ensure  immunity  for  them;  on  the  contrary, 
it  but  imposed  greater  obligations  upon  them : 

"Hear    this   word   which    Yiiwii    hath    pronounced 

against  you,  O  Israelites, 
against  the  whole  race,  which  I  led  forth  from  Eg>pt; 
Verily  I  have  taken  more  care  of  you 
than  of  any  other  race  of  the  earth;  ^ 
hence  I  will  visit  all  your  sins  upon  you"  (III,  ij. 

*  raq  has  here  not  restrictive  but  mtcnsivc  force,  as  in  Gen-  XX, 


3o8  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

This  latter  verse  sounds  like  a  paradox  when  taken  by 
itself,  but  in  the  light  of  Chaps.  I,  2-II  the  prophet's 
meaning  is  plain.  Amos  means  to  tell  the  Israelites, 
they  have  indeed  experienced  Yhwh's  providence 
in  an  especial  degree;  but,  in  the  very  beginning  of 
their  history,  by  leading  them  out  of  Egypt  Yhwh 
revealed  Himself  to  them  as  a  God  of  justice,  and 
now  since  they  have  persistently  scorned  His  laws  of 
justice  and  trampled  on  humanity.  He,  as  a  God  of 
justice,  is  bound  to  visit  all  their  sins  upon  them. 

2.    SPIRITUAL  RELIGION  VERSUS  RITUALISTIC  PIETY 

The  second  illusion  which  closed  the  people's  mind 
to  the  prophet's  preaching  was  the  significance  which 
they  attached  to  the  cult  and  ritual.  Indeed,  in 
ancient  Israel,  as  throughout  antiquity,  '  worship  of 
God '  was  synonymous  with  ritual  and  sacrifices, 
for  the  people  beheved  that,  above  everything  else, 
Yhwh  laid  stress  on  the  punctilious  observance  of  the 
ritual  and  on  regularity  and  zeal  in  offering  sacrifices. 
An  excellent  illustration  of  this  belief  is  the  record, 
II  Ki.  XVII,  24-28,^  about  the  reco Ionization  of 
Samaria  by  Sargon  with  people  drawn  from  remote 

II,  Deut.  rv,  6,  Is.  XXVIII,  19,  et  alit.;  jada  is  used  to  connote 
"God's  providential  care,"  as  in  Hos.  XIII,  5,  Nah.  I,  7  and  Ps.  I,  6 — 
in  the  two  latter  passages  the  meaning  is  evident  from  the  parallelism; 
and  min  is  the  min  of  comparison.  This  meaning  of  v.  3a  is  the  only 
one  consistent  with  the  general  drift  of  the  preceding  discourse,  I, 
2-II,  as  sketched  above,  and  with  Amos'  em.phatic  denial  in  IX,  7 
that  Israel  enjoys  a  monopoly  of  God's  favor.  Thus  the  contradiction 
that  has  been  supposed  to  exist  between  III,  2  and  I,  2-II,  and  partic- 
ularly between  III,  2  and  IX,  7,  does  not  exist  in  reality.  It  arose 
from  the  incorrect  translation:  "Ye  only  have  I  known  (or  'do  I 
know')  ot  all  the  races  of  the  earth." 

1  Verses   29-41    consist  of  later  additions  to   this  record.     The 


SPIRITUAL   RELIGION  309 

parts  of  the  Assyrian  empire— a  record  which  is  most 
important  for  our  pnqjosc  since  it  dates  from  the  very 
time  of  the  prophets.  The  author  ascribes  tlie  in- 
crease of  wild  animals  in  tlie  devastated  regions  of 
Samaria  to  the  fact  that  the  new  settlers  at  first  failed 
to  worship  YH\ni — tJiat  is,  failed  to  worship  Him  in 
the  sanctuaries  of  the  country  and  according  to  the 
rules  of  the  ritual.  And,  what  is  equally  signilicant, 
the  Assyrian  colonists  are  represented  as  viewing  the 
matter  in  the  same  light.  They  petitioned  for  the 
return  of  one  of  the  priests  who  had  been  deported, 
that  they  might  be  instructed  by  him  in  the  ritual 
observances  essential  for  the  Yh\\'h  worship. 

In  view  of  the  importance  which  the  ritual  possessed 
in  their  minds,  it  was  but  natural  that  the  people 
should  bestow  on  it  the  greatest  vigilance  and  as- 
siduity. Whenever  disaster  befell  them,  they  accepted 
it  as  a  sign  that  Yhwh  was  displeased  with  them; 
their  concern  for  the  cult  was  wont  to  grow  in  propor- 
tion to  the  severity  of  the  visitation,  and  they  would 
seek  to  appease  Yhwh's  wrath  by  increased  otTerings 
and  gifts  and  by  holy  assembhes. 

This  behef  of  the  people  that  they  could  worship 
God  by  celebrating  festivals  and  please  Him  by 
offering  sacrifices  was  vigorously  assailed  by  Amos  and  / 
his  successors,  for  the  prophets  acknowledged  no 
other  mode  of  worship  tlian  the  worship  of  God  in  the 
spirit,  that  is  to  say,  by  faith  and  by  righteous  con- 
duct (see  Part  H,  Chap.  II,  pp.  1531!.). 

In  this  connection  Jeremiah's  impassioned  Temple- 
sermon  may  be   recalled,  where  he  denounces   the 

importance  of  this  record  has  been  pointed  out  by  Hans  Schmidt  in 
"  Die  Schriftcn  des  Alt.  Test's"  herausgcg.  v.  Grcssmann,  etc.,  II, 
2,  p.  5. 


3IO  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

people  for  putting  their  trust  in  such  delusions  as  the 
Temple  and  the  cult  and  bids  them  dispense  with  their 
sacrifices,  since  the  only  thing  that  can  avail  them  is 
to  amend  their  hves  and  practise  justice.^ 

To  the  same  effect  is  Isaiah's  utterance: 

"The  Lord  God  speaks,  because  this  people  ap- 
proach me  with  their  mouths, 

and  honor  me  with  their  hps,  but  their  heart  is  far 
from  me, 

and  their  worship  is  but  a  precept 

devised  by  man  and  learned  by  rote, 

therefore  I  will  deal  with  this  people  to  [their]  con- 
fusion, 

so  that  the  wisdom  of  their  sages  will  vanish, 

and  the  intelligence  of  their  wise  men  be  confounded" 
(Is.  XXIX,  13-14). 

Similarly  Hosea  declares  in  the  name  of  God : 

"Love  do  I  desire,  and  not  sacrifices, 

and  knowledge  of  God,  not  holocausts"  (Hos.  VI,  6). 

Then,  too,  we  have  the  great  passage  from  Micah: 

"Wherewith  shall  I  approach  the  Lord, 
wherewith  shall  I  bow  myself  before  God  on  High? 
Shall  I  approach  Him  with  burnt-offerings, 
with  calves  of  a  year  old? 
Doth  God  take  dehght  in  thousands  of  rams, 
or  in  myriads  of  streamlets  of  oil? 
Shall  I  give  my  first-bom  in  atonement  of  my  trans- 
gression, 
the  fruit  of  my  womb  in  expiation  of  my  sin? 

1  See  sitpra,  Part  I,  Chap.  I,  pp.  iiff. 


SPIRITUAL  RELIGION  .^  1 1 

He  hath  told  thee,  O  man,  what  is  good; 

and  what  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee, 

but  to  do  justice  and  to  love  mercy, 

and  to  walk  humbly  with  thy  God!"  (Mic.  VI,  6-8) 

All  this  we  are  inclined  to  accept  to-day  as  self- 
evident  truth;  but  to  the  Israelites  of  Amos'  age  such 
utterances  must  have  seemed  intolerable  blasphemy, 
and  the  prophet  who  dared  to  proclaim  them,  little 
short  of  a  madman.  What  did  he  mean  by  proph- 
esying irrevocable  doom  to  them?  Did  they  not  offer 
daily  sacrifices  to  God?  Did  tliey  not  seek  con- 
stantly to  appease  His  wrath  by  holocausts?  Did 
they  not  observe  His  festivals,  the  days  of  solemn  as- 
sembly, and  offer  thanksgiving  to  Him  and  sin-  and 
peace-offerings?  Amos,  however,  points  out  to  them 
the  mocker>'  of  their  belief  that  they  serve  Yuwii 
by  festal  celebrations  and  sacrifices,  and  induce  His 
good-will  by  ritual  obser\'ances.  Referring  to  their 
visits  to  the  holy  shrines,  which  visits  represented  the 
very  acme  of  piety  to  their  minds,  he  says  caustically: 

"Go   to  Beth-El  and   sin,   to   Gilgal  and   sin  more, 

in  that  ye  bring  the  following  day  your  sacrifices, 

the  third  day  your  tithes, 

and  sacrifice  thank-offerings  of  leavened  bread, 

and  loudly  invite  to  free-will  offerings; 

for  so  do  ye  love  to  do,  O  IsraeUtes, 

saith  the  Lord  God"  (Am.  IV,  4f.). 

With  characteristic  vigor  he  thunders  forth  in  the 
name  of  God: 

''I  loathe,  I  despise  your  festivals, 
I  oinnot  abide  your  sacred  assemblies. 
WTien  ye  offer  me  sacrifices  and  gifts 


312  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

I  do  not  care  for  them, 

and  at  your  thank-offering  of  fatted  calves  I  do  not 

look. 
Begone  from  me  with  the  noise  of  your  hymns! 
To  the  music  of  your  harps  I  will  no  longer  listen" 

(V,  21-23). 

Justice  and  righteousness  alone,  he  tells  them,  have 
value  in  God's  eyes,  and  only  by  cultivating  these 
can  one  serve  Him  and  incur  His  favor: 

"But  let  justice  flow  forth  like  water, 

and  righteousness  like  a  perennial  stream"     (ib.,  24). 

And  again : 

*'Seek  good  and  not  evil,  that  ye  may  live, 

and  God  be  really  with  you  as  ye  believe. 

Nay,  hate  evil  and  love  good 

and  establish  justice  in  the  gate  of  justice, — 

Perchance  the  Lord,  God  Sabaoth  might  show  mercy 

unto  decimated  Joseph"  (V,  14-15). 

Equally  emphatic  is  Isaiah : 

''Hear  the  word  of  God,  ye  chieftains  of  Sodom! 
Give  ear  to  the  revelation  of  our  God,  people  of 

Gomorrah ! 
What  is  the  multitude  of  your  sacrifices  to  me,  saith 

the  Lord? 
I  have  enough  of  your  holocausts  of  rams  and  the  fat 

of  fed  beasts; 
and  in  the  blood  of  bullocks  and  he-goats  I  deUght  not. 
That  ye  come  to  appear  before  me, 
who  hath  required  this  of  you — to  tread  my  courts? 
Bring  vain  offerings  no  more! 


SPIRITUAL  RELIGION  313 

Bringing  sacrifices  is  an  abomination  to  mc! 

Xew  moon  and  Sabbath,   tlie  calling  of  assemblies 

I  cannot  endure  .... 

Your  New  moons  and  >'our  festivals  my  soul  doth  hate, 

they  are  a  burden  unto  me; 

I  am  weary  of  bearing  it. 

And  when  }-e  spread  forth  }'our  hands 

I  hide  mine  e}'es  from  }-ou ; 

even  if  ye  offer  up  many  prayers,  I  will  not  hear: 

Your  hands  are  full  of  blood. 

Cleanse  yourselves!    Purify  yourselves! 

Remove  your  wicked  deeds  from  mine  eyes! 

Cease  to  do  evil!    Learn  to  do  good! 

Practise  justice!     Hold  in  check  the  oppressor! 

Secure  the  right  of  the  fatherless! 

Plead  the  cause  of  the  widow! 

Come,  let  us  reason,  saith  the  Lord: 

If  your  sins  are  as  scarlet,  shall  they  become  white  as 

snow? 
If  they  are  red  as  crimson,  shall  they  become  white  as 

wool? 
If  ye  be  willing  and  obedient,  ye  may  enjoy  the  fruit  of 

the  land; 
but  if  ye  refuse  and  be  rebellious,  ye  shall  be  consumed 

by  the  sword — 
It  is  the  mouth  of  God  that  speaketh  "  (Is.  I,  10-20). 

It  is  very  diflicult  for  us  to  realize  what  a  tremen- 
dous advance  in  religious  thought  was  marked  by  this 
view  of  the  prophets  as  to  what  constitutes  true 
worship.  It  must  be  remembered  that  it  was  not  only 
for  their  Israelitish  contemporaries  that  the  worship 
of  God  had  no  wider  significance  than  the  cult.  To 
whatever  literature  of  ancient  times  we  may  turn,  we 


314  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

see  that  religion  was  identified  with  ritual  and  sacri- 
fices, and  that  in  these  the  whole  religious  life  centered. 
Take,  e.  g.,  the  sacred  literature  of  the  Hindus — 
a  name,  which  for  most  people  is  synonymous  with 
the  most  profound  philosophy  and  the  loftiest  religious 
views,  but  wrongly  so,  as  far  as  the  older  period,  the 
pre-Buddhistic  times,  are  concerned.  In  the  Rigveda 
the  sacrifices  are  the  centre  of  interest.  They  were 
regarded  as  the  sum  total  of  all  mysteries,  and  upon 
them  were  thought  to  depend  both  the  material  and 
the  spiritual  order  of  things— a  view,  which,  notwith- 
standing the  teaching  of  the  prophets,  is  also  found  in 
the  Talmud.^  The  numerous  rules  which  had  to  be 
scrupulously  carried  out  to  ensure  the  efficacy  of  the 
sacrifice  are  described  in  the  52//ra-literature  and  in  the 
addenda  to  the  latter  (the  Prayogas  and  the  Padd- 
thatis)  not  less  minutely  than  in  the  Talmud. 

But  from  the  Old  Babylonian  literature  we  have 
perhaps  the  best  illustration  of  the  fact  that  in  ancient 
times  the  great  object  of  men's  concern  was  the 
ritual.  Among  the  most  interesting  rehgious  monu- 
ments we  have  of  ancient  Babylon  are  the  so-called 

^  As  to  this  belief  in  the  efEcacy  of  sacrifices  in  the  Rigveda,  cf. 
Oldenberg,  "Die  Religion  des  Veda,"  pp.  315-317. 

Of  the  frequent  statements  to  this  effect  in  the  Talmudic  and 
Midrashic  literature,  it  will  suffice  to  refer  to  the  regulation  stated  in 
Mishna  Taanith,  IV,  i,  that  the  twenty-four  divisions,  chosen  from 
all  over  the  country  and  deputed  to  go  to  the  Temple  in  Jerusalem  to 
participate  in  the  sacrificial  service,  and  the  corresponding  divisions, 
which  at  the  set  time  of  the  sacrificial  service  assembled  in  the  coun- 
try towns,  recite  daily  the  story  of  the  creation.  Gen.  I-II,  3.  The 
reason  for  this  regulation  is  stated  in  both  the  Palestinian  and  the 
Babylonian  Gemara:  "If  it  were  not  for  the  sacrificial  cult,  the  world 
would  not  exist,"  etc. — See  Taan.  bab.  27b,  jer.  IV,  2,  fin.,  Meg.  bab. 
31b;  in  the  latter  passage  Jer.  XXXIII,  25  is  quoted  as  scriptural 
authority,  and  interpreted  as  meaning  something  altogether  different 


SPIRITU.\L  RELIGION  315 

Penitential  Psiilms,  which,  of  late  years,  have  often 
been  compared  with  our  Penitential  Psalms  of  the 
Bible.  There  is,  however,  a  vital  dilTerencc  between 
the  two.  In  the  Babylonian  Psalms  the  penitent  is 
solely  concerned  lest  he  have  overlooked  some  ritual 
observance,  and  have  incurred  thereby  the  displeasure 
of  the  god  or  goddess,  whereas  in  the  Bibliail  Psalms 
it  is  by  the  consciousness  of  human  imperfection,  of 
moral  instabihty  that  the  psalmist  is  oppressed.  The 
Hebrew  Penitential  Psalms  show  the  influence  and 
breathe  the  spirit  of  the  prophetic  teaching.^ 

The  primitive  conceptions  at  the  root  of  the  sacrifi- 
cial cult  are  most  apparent  in  the  twofold  purpose 
which  it  was  thought  to  serve.  Sacrifices  were  re- 
garded, on  the  one  hand,  as  the  medium  by  which  man 
might  enter  into  or  renew^  communion  with  the  deity, 
as  the  sacramental  meal  by  which  the  bond  between 
the  devotee  and  his  god  was  established — for  par- 
taking at  the  god's  table  meant  being  admitted  to  his 
friendship;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  as  the  most 
efficacious  means  of  incurring  the  favor  of  the  deity. 

In  the  latter  respect  it  must  be  remembered  that, 
in  return  for  his  holocausts  and  sacrifices,  the  offerer 
expected  from  the  deity,  not  spiritual  gifts,  but  purely 
material  blessings,  such  as  a  plentiful  harvest,  numer- 
ous flocks,  long  life,  or,  for  the  nation  at  large,  pros- 
perity, conquest,  and  so  on. 

It  was  this  grossly  materialistic  conception  of  reli- 
gion that  was  so  repugnant  to  the  prophets.    It  was 

from  what  it  really  says:  it  is  taken  to  say:  "If  my  covenant  were  not 
kept  up  day  and  night,  I  would  not  have  established  the  orders  of 
heaven  and  earth." — "My  covenant"  is  understood  as  denoting  the 
sacrificial  cult  ordained  at  Sinai. 

'  The  above  remarks  apply  especially  to  Psalms  LI  and  CXXX, 
which  excel  in  depth  of  thought  and  religioui  feeling. 


3i6  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

this  that  Hosea  had  in  mind  when  he  upbraided  his 
contemporaries : 

"They  do  not  pray  from  their  hearts; 
when  they  cry  in  their  vigils, 

they  are  exercised  because  of  their  grain  and  wine  " 
(Hos.  VII,  14). 

He  would  have  them  pray,  not  for  their  temporal 
welfare,  not  for  the  gratification  of  their  material 
wants,  but  to  satisfy  the  needs  of  their  soul. 

But  to  such  a  spiritualization  of  religion  the  people 
were  necessarily  impervious.  Their  own  conception 
was  like  a  barrier,  against  which  the  prophetic  ideas 
beat  in  vain.  Hence  the  repeated  declarations  of 
the  prophets  that  it  was  because  of  their  religious 
delusions  and  their  mistaken  cult  that  the  people  were 
so  blind  to  the  real  truth — that  is  to  say,  to  the  fact 
which  they  considered  all-essential,  that  only  righteous- 
ness and  purity  of  heart  have  weight  with  God,  and 
that  only  by  cultivating  these  can  one  serve  Him. 
As  Hosea  represents  it,  the  cause  of  the  people's  god- 
less life  lies  in  the  fact  that  their  altars  and  sacrifices 
are  of  paramount  concern  to  them : 

"A  luxuriant  vine  was  Israel, 
whose  fruit  grew  plentifully. 
The  more  its  fruit  increased, 
the  more  numerous  it  made  its  altars; 
the  more  the  land  prospered, 
the  more  beautiful  massebas  they  built. 
Ephraim  has  built  many  altars — 
its  altars  have  caused  it  to  sin."  ^  (Hos.  X,  i  and 
VIII,  11). 

'  The  second  lalfio  is  to  be  omitted  as  a  mistaken  repetition  of  the 
first. 


SPIRITU.VL  RELIGION  317 

It  may  be  noted  incidentally  that  Hosea  consistently 
refers  to  the  people's  sacrifices  and  otlier  religious 
practices  as  sin,  lewdness,  iniquity;  cf.  IV,  8,  12,  V, 
4-6.1 

The  great  value  of  the  oft-quoted  passage  from 
IMicah  consists  therein  that  both  conceptions,  the 
false  conception  of  the  people  and  the  vital  conception 
of  the  prophets,  are  placed  side  by  side,  so  that  the 
immense  spiritual  advance  of  the  latter  over  the  for- 
mer is  brought  home  to  us  most  forcibly  by  the  con- 
trast: 

''WTierewith  shall  I  approach  the  Lord, 

wherewith  shall  I  bow  myself  before  God  on  high? 

Shall  I  approach  Him  with  burnt-ofTerings, 

with  calves  of  a  year  old?"  concluding, 

^  "They  (the  priests)  feed  on  the  sin  of  my  people  (/.  c,  they  de- 
rive a  revenue  from  the  sacrifices), 

they  are  desirous  of  their  iniquity. 

My  people  consult  their  wooden  blocks, 

and  their  staff  lellclh  them  the  oracle."  (The  reference  is,  no 
doubt,  to  the  practice  of  consulting  the  oracle  by  means  of 
wooden  blocks  or  staves;  cf.  I  Sam.  XIV,  41,  as  read  by  the 
LXX.) 

"For  a  spirit  of  lewdness  hath  misled  them, 

so  that,  faithless,  they  have  strayed  away  from  their  God. 

Their  deeds  do  not  permit  them  to  return  to  their  God, 

for  a  spirit  of  lewdness  possesseth  them, 

and  they  know  not  God. 

Thus  doth  Israel's  pride  testify  to  its  face, 

Ephraim  must  come  to  fall  through  its  guilt, 

Judah  also  shall  come  to  fall  with  it.  (Omit  w'jisra'il  «-*,  and 
accordingly  read  'immo  for  'immam.) 

With  their  sheep  and  their  cattle  will  they  then  go  to  seek  Yuwu, 

but  they  will  not  find  Him; 

for  He  hath  withdrawn  Himself  from  them." 


3i8  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

"He  hath  told  thee,  O  man,  what  is  good; 
and  what  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee, 
but  to  do  justice  and  to  love  mercy, 
and  to  walk  humbly  with  thy  God." 

Various  passages  from  the  other  prophets  might  be 
cited  confirming  or  supplementing  this  formulation  of 
Micah.^  Each  one  expresses  some  phase  of  that  most 
essential  truth  of  prophetic  religion,  that  regarding 
the  relation  of  man  to  God.  We  might  sum  up  briefly 
our  conclusions  from  them  all  as  follows: 

Contrary  to  the  views  of  their  times  that  only 
through  the  medium  of  ritual  and  sacrifice,  of  temple 
and  priest,  could  man  have  intercourse  with  God,  the 
prophets,  for  the  first  time  in  the  history  of  human 
thought,  gave  expression  to  the  fundamental  ethical 
truth  that  God  is  present  in  every  human  heart,  and 
that,  by  virtue  of  this,  it  is  in  every  man's  power 
to  enjoy  communion  with  Him  without  any  mediator- 
ship  whatever,  the  only  condition  being  that  he  who 
would  hold  converse  with  God,  must  live  a  life  of  pu- 
rity and  righteousness  and  walk  humbly  with  God. 

In  accordance  with  this,  the  glorious  future  consum- 
mation, which  is  the  ideal  of  the  prophets,  will  consist 
therein,  that  the  whole  people  will  know  God,  that 
every  man  will  experience  God  in  his  heart  and  strive 
evermore  after  justice  and  righteousness;  -  Jeremiah 
even  goes  so  far  as  to  predict  that  in  the  ideal  future 

1  Cf.  particularly  Jer.  XXIII,  23  (see  supra,  Part  II,  Chap.  II, 
pp.  1462.)  and  also  Is.  LVII,  15. 

"Thus  speaketh  the  High  and  Sublime  One, 

Who  abide th  forever  and  \Vhose  name  is  Holy  One: 

On  high  and  as  the  Holy  One  do  I  abide, 

and  with  him  who  is  contrite  and  humble  in  spirit." 

2  Cf.  especially  Hos.  VI,  3,  II,  2 if.,  and  see  supra,  pp.  248fE. 


SPIRITU.\L  RELIGION  31Q 

all  codified  law  will  be  dispensed  with,  since  God's 
moral  law  will  be  indelibly  inscribed  in  the  heart  of 
each  individual  and  will  assert  itself  unfailingly  in 
every  conscience: 

"Days  shall  come,  saith  the  Lord, 

when  I  shall  make  a  new  covenant 

with  the  house  of  Israel  and  the  house  of  Judah; 

not  like  the  covenant  which  I  made  with  tlieir  fathers 

the  day  that  I  took  tliem  by  the  hand 

to  lead  tliem  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 

which  covenant  they  broke,  so  that  I  cast  tliem  off.' 

But  this  will  be  the  covenant 

which  I  shall  make  witli  the  house  of  Israel 

in  the  days  to  come,  saith  the  Lord : 

I  shall  implant  my  law  in  tlieir  minds, 

and  I  shall  write  it  in  their  hearts, 

and  I  shall  be  to  them  a  God,  and  they  will  be  to  me  a 

people — 
Then  they  will  no  longer  need  to  teach  one  another 
with  the  words,  'Know  God!' 
For  they  will  all  know  me, 
from  the  least  of  them  unto  the  greatest  of  them,  s:iith 

the  Lord  "  Qer.  XXXI,  31-34). 

Having  reached  with  this  vision  of  Jeremiah  the 
very  pinnacle  of  prophetic  ideahsm  (than  which  no 
visionar}'  of  whatever  age  could  go  farther),  we  shall 
go  back  to  the  rituaHstic  religion  of  ancient  Israel, 
to  take  up  another  phase  of  it— a  phase  which,  though 
its  full  discussion  belongs  in  the  second  volume,  must 
briefly  be  touched  on  here  in  order  to  set  forth  in  all 
its  bearings  the  prophets'  position  to  the  cult.     In 

'  Read,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX  and  Posh.,  ga'alli  instead  of 
ba'dlti. 


32  o  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

ancient  Israel,  as  throughout  antiquity,  religion  was 
inseparably  bound  up  with  the  forms  of  political  life, 
with  nation  and  country.  In  accordance  with  their 
conception  of  Yhwh  as  the  national  God,  the 
Israelitish  people  believed  that  He  could  be  wor- 
shipped only  within  the  sphere  of  His  influence,  that 
is  within  the  domain  of  Israel.  Thus  David,  reproach- 
ing Saul  for  banishing  him  from  the  country,  says,  in 
case  men  incited  him  to  that  course:  "Be  they  cursed 
before  Yhwh,  for  they  have  driven  me  away  this 
day  from  sharing  in  the  heritage  of  Yhwh,  saying: 
'Go,  worship  other  gods.'"  (I  Sam.  XXVI,  19). 
In  Deut.  XXVIII,  64  we  find:  "The  Lord  shall 
scatter  thee  among  the  nations  all  over  the  earth,  and 
there  thou  shalt  worship  other  gods,  which  neither 
thou  nor  thy  fathers  have  known,  of  wood  and  stone." 
Similarly  Hosea,  speaking  from  the  people's  point  of 
view,  asks  his  contemporaries  what  they  will  do  at  the 
festive  season,  on  the  day  of  the  feast  of  Yhwh,  when 
they  are  exiled  from  "Yhwh's  country,"  and,  con- 
sequently, are  unable  to  sacrifice  to  Him: 

"They  shall  no  longer  dwell  in  the  land  of  Yhwh, 

Ephraim  must  go  back  to  Egypt, 

or  in  Assyria  they  shall  eat  unclean  things. 

Then  they  will  not  be  able  to  pour  libations  to  Yhwh, 

nor  to  prepare  ^  their  sacrifices  to  Him; 

their  bread  ^   will  be  like   the  bread  of  mourning, 

all  that  eat  thereof  will  be  defiled; 

their  bread  wiU  serve  but  to  satisfy  their  hunger,^ 

^  'Read  jaarkhii  instead  oijaeaerbhu. 

2  Read  instead  of  lahaem:  lahmam,  a  reading  clearly  indicated  by 
the  second  part  of  the  verse. 

'  Cf.  Prov.  XVI,  26,  "The  hunger  (naephaes)  of  the  toiler  drives 
him  to  toil." 


SPIRITUAL  RELIGION  321 

it  will  not  come  in  the  house  of  Yhwh. 
What  will  ye  do  then  at  tlic  festive  season, 
on  the  day  of  the  feast  of  Yiiwh?"    (Hos.  IX,  3-5; 
c/.  also  III, 4,  and  Ezek.  IV,  12I.). 

But  the  most  essential  feature  of  this  system  was 
that  religion  was  primarily  the  concern  of  tlie  com- 
munity, not  of  the  individual;  tlie  individual,  as  the 
above-quoted  passage  from  I  Sam.  XXVI,  19  shows, 
could  share  in  the  service  of  YHWII,  and  enjoy  the 
fellowship  of  faith  only  by  virtue  of  being  a  member  of 
the  social-religious  community.  The  prime  object  of 
all  religious  celebrations  and  functions  was  the  promo- 
tion of  tlie  common  weal,  not  of  the  individual  well- 
being.  As  W.  Robertson  Smith  well  describes  it: 
"  In  ancient  religion,  as  it  appears  among  the  Semites, 
the  confident  assurance  of  divine  help  belongs,  not 
to  each  man  in  his  private  concerns,  but  to  the  com- 
munity in  its  public  functions  and  aims;  and  it  is 
this  assurance  that  is  expressed  in  public  acts  of 
worship,  where  all  the  membersof  the  community  meet 
together  to  eat  and  drink  at  the  table  of  their  god, 
and  so  renew  the  sense  that  he  and  they  are  altogether 
at  one.  .  .  .  The  good  things  which  religion  holds 
forth  are  promised  to  the  individual  only  in  so  far  as  he 
Hves  in  and  for  the  community."  ^  With  this  purpose 
and  character  of  religion  it  accords  that  the  basis  of 
the  old  Israelitish  system  of  government  was  the  tribal 
or  patriarchal  order  of  society — much  like  the  order 
that  prevailed  in  China  up  to  very  recent  date— and, 
what  follows  from  this,  that  it  was  by  the  principle 
of  tribal  solidarity  and  responsibility  that  the  whole 
social-religious  Life  of  preexilic  Israel  was  governed. 

'  "  The  Religion  of  the  Semites,"  pp.  266f. 


322  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

This  order  of  things  must  be  borne  in  mind  if  we  are 
to  reahze  the  full  significance  of  the  prophetic  concep- 
tion of  the  relation  of  the  individual  to  his  God.  For 
the  prophets  religion  meant  individual  piety.  They  re- 
pudiated the  idea  of  tribal  responsibility,  of  mediator- 
ship  and  sacrifices,  and,  instead,  set  up  as  standard  for 
the  individual  a  humble  consciousness  of  God — for  He 
is  a  "present  God" — and  the  moral  obligation  and 
desire  to  do  what  is  just  and  right — for  He  is  a  "holy 
God."  This  conception  of  religion  marks  a  new  era 
in  the  religious  development  of  Israel,  for  through  it 
religion  became  dissociated  from  the  confines  of 
nation  and  country;  it  ceased  to  be  part  and  parcel 
of  the  political-social  order  into  which  a  man  was 
born,  and  became  preeminently  the  concern  of  the 
individual. 

It  should  be  stated  that,  while  all  the  prophets 
implicitly  opposed  the  old  belief  in  tribal  solidarity 
and  collective  responsibility,  it  was  Jeremiah  in 
particular,  who  explicitly  formulated  the  new  idea  of 
moral  freedom  and  individual  responsibility : 

"In  those  days  (i.  e.  in  the  days  of  the  future  Israel) 
it  shall  no  longer  be  said: 
'The  fathers  have  eaten  sour  grapes, 
and  the  teeth  of  the  children  are  set  on  edge;' 
but  every  one  will  die  for  his  own  sin — 
he  ^  that  eateth  sour  grapes,  his  teeth  will  be  set  on 
edge."    (Jer.  XXXI,  29-30). 

It  is  not  surprising  that  Jeremiah  was  the  one  to 
give  expression  to  this  thought,  for  of  him  it  is  more 
true  than  of  any  other  prophet  that  his  relation  to 

1  Omit  kol  ha'adam,  in  accordance  with  the  LXX. 


RIGHTEOUSNESS  323 

God  was  of  a  conscious,  personal  nature.  On  God  he 
relied  utterly  with  heart  and  reason — from  him  he 
derived  his  strengtli,  his  comfort,  and  his  hope;  and 
his  conclusions  regarding  individual  versus  collective 
responsibility,  as  also  his  picture  of  tlie  ideal,  future 
Israel  (which  directly  follows  tlie  verses  just  quoted), 
are  the  outgrowth  of  his  own  spiritual  experience.' 

3.    RIGHTEOUSNESS  THE  TRUE  FOUNDATION  OF  SOCIETY 

There  is  still  another  point  on  which  the  views  of  the 
prophets  were  diametrically  opposed  to  those  of  their 
contemporaries,  and  on  which  Amos,  in  especial,  is 
most  outspoken.  This  is  in  regard  to  the  social  and 
economic  conditions  which  prevailed  throughout  the 
land. 

It  was  the  injustice  of  these  conditions  and,  as  we 
have  notcxi  above,  the  undue  inflation  of  the  nation 
at  large  because  of  the  successful  issue  of  the  wars  of 
Jeroboam  II,  that  fired  the  soul  of  Amos  to  wrath 
and  to  the  belief  that  retribution  must  follow.- 

In  those  times,  even  as  in  our  ovm  days,  wealth  and 
prosperity  were  looked  upon  as  the  bulwark  of  the 
nation's  strength,  and  as  the  unmistakable  sign  of 
God's  favor;  and,  consequently,  nothing  was  so  highly 
valued  and  so  dihgently  sought  after  as  material 
prosperity. 

But  Amos  had  very  different  views.     To  him  the 

'  What  has  been  remarked  at  the  beginning  of  this  paragraph 
applies  particularly  to  this  last  point.  We  must  defer  to  the  second 
volume  the  proof  that  the  departure  from  the  old  order  of  things  did 
not  start  in  the  juridical  sphere,  but  in  the  sphere  of  religion,  and 
that  it  was  Jeremiah,  and  not  Ezckiel,  who  first  formulated  the 
principle  of  moral  freedom  and  individual  responsibility. 

*See  supra,  pp.  ^jjff. 


324  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

country's  wealth  was  offset  by  the  impoverishment  of 
the  masses,  and  the  ease  and  luxury  to  which  the 
upper  classes  complacently  gave  themselves  up  were 
purchased  by  the  sweat  of  the  poor: 

"Proclaim  in  the  palaces  of  Asdod 
and  in  the  palaces  of  the  land  of  Egypt, 
and  bid  them  assemble  in  Mt.  Samaria, 
and  witness  the  lawlessness  and  oppression  therein. 
They  know  not  how  to  do  right,  they 
who   let  violence  and   tyranny  hold   sway  in   then- 
palaces "    (Am.  Ill,  gf.). 

The  pleasure-loving  women  of  the  capital,  whom  he 
contemptuously  calls  "Kine  of  Bashan,"  ^  vied  with 
their  husbands  in  gratifying  their  avarice  and  their 
desire  for  luxurious  living: 

"Hear  this,  ye  Kine  of  Bashan,   in  Mt.   Samaria, 

who  oppress  the  poor  and  crush  the  needy, 

who  speak  to  their  lords: 

Get  [the  means]  that  we  may  carouse!"    (IV,  i). 

On  account  of  these  conditions,  the  whole  splendid 
structure  of  which  the  nation  boasts  is  to  Amos  a 
tottering  edifice,  a  mighty  evil  doomed  to  destruction. 
He  represents  God  speaking:  "I  loathe  the  pride  of 
Jacob,"  viz.,  the  splendid  palaces  of  sin,  the  whole 
flourishing  constitution  of  the  state  founded  on 
despotism,  "and  I  shall  deliver  up  the  city  and  her 
wealth."    (\T,8). 

^  Bashan  was  noted  for  its  fertile  territory  and  its  fine  breed  of 
cattle. 


RIGHTEOUSNESS  325 

-Viid  again  he  says : 

"Hear  this,  ye  who  would  swallow  up  the  needy, 

and  who  ruin  the  poor  of  tlie  country, 

who  speak,  when  will  the  New  Moon  be  gone, 

that  we  may  sell  com? 

and  the  Sabbath,  tliat  we  may  open  the  granaries? — 

make  the  measure  small  and  the  price  high 

and  deal  falsely  with  tlie  balances  of  deceit!  ^ — 

that  we  may  buy  the  poor  for  silver 

and  tlie  needy  for  a  pair  of  shoes,^ 

and  that  we  may  sell  refuse  of  grain? 

Vhwh  has  sworn  by  the  pride  of  Jacob, 

I  will  never  forget  one  of  tlieir  deeds."     (VIII,  4-7). 

Again  and  again  Amos  tells  his  audience  it  is  be- 
cause of  the  orgies  indulged  in  in  the  palaces  of  the  rich  f 
and  the  injustice  practised  towards  the  poor  that  the  I 
nation  must  come  to  ruin.  For  it  is  just  as  impossible, 
he  tells  them,  for  a  state  to  exist  in  which  right  and 
justice  are  perverted,  as  it  would  be  for  horses  to  race 
over  rocks,  or  as  it  would  be  to  plow  the  sea  with  oxen  ^ 
(VI,  12). 

According  to  Amos  the  day  of  utter  woe  and  terror 
(V,  i8ff.),  when  this  whole  structure  of  social  wrong 
will  be  destroyed,  will  be  a  day  of  victor}^  for  Yhwh — 
but  victory  in  the  sense  that  on  that  day  God's 
justice  shall  triumph  over  lawlessness  and  sin,  and 

*  "Make  the  measure  small"  etc. — the  prophet  throws  this  in  as  a 
sarcastic  reference  to  their  business  methods. 

*  "  For  a  pair  of  shoes,"  that  is  to  say,  "  for  a  trifle." 

•Instead  oi  jch^roi  babb'qarim  read,  as  J.  I).  Michaclis  with  fine 
acumen  emended,  jeharel  babbaqar  jam.  babb^qarim  is  a  plain  case 
of  false  word-division,  and  this  b  turn  led  to  the  mistaken  vocaliza- 
tion >a/i*roJ. 


32  6  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

his  eternal    righteousness   be   manifest    to    all    the 
world. 

Similarly  Isaiah  describes  his  nation's  day  of  doom. 
When  all  earthly  glory  sinks  in  the  dust  at  Yhwh's 
appearance  for  judgment,  men's  eyes  will  be  opened 
to  the  vanity  of  their  idols,  to  the  vanity  of  all  things 
material,  and  they  will  realize  that  the  distance 
between  the  human  and  the  divine  is  a  moral  one, 
will  realize  that  God's  Kingdom  is  the  Kingdom  of 
morahty : 

"On  that  day  the  Lord  Sabaoth  will  be  exalted  by 
justice, 

and  the  Holy  God  will  show  Himself  holy  by  right- 
eousness." ^ 

This  is  the  ethical  monotheism  of  the  prophets,  this 
their  contribution  to  religious  thought,  their  message 
to  mankind,  that  it  is  in  man's  moral  nature  that 
religion  has  its  roots,  that  it  is  the  spiritual,  not 
the  material  world  whence  the  idea  of  the  divine 
flows  into  man's  soul,  that  it  is  the  sense  of  right  and 
justice  innate  in  man  that  brings  him  ever  new  as- 
surance of  the  existence  of  God  and  of  His  control  of 
the  universe  for  a  moral  purpose — or,  as  the  prophetic 
author  ^  of  the  story,  "Elijah  on  Mt.  Horeb,"  puts  it, 
that  it  is  by  "the  still,  small  voice"  that  God  reveals 
Himself  to  man. 

^  Cf.  Is.  II,  6-22  -f  XVII,  7-8,  V,  15-16,  and  see  supra,  p.  260,  n.  2. 
2  See  supra,  p.  161,  n.  i. 


SUPPLEMENTARY  NOTE  (p.  36) 

On  n3-t'?.rN^  I  Sam.  XXI,  9 

Modem  as  well  as  medicTval  scholars  have  been 
divided  as  to  whether  to  take  PN  of  I  Sam.  XXI,  9 
as  irregular  form  of  rx,  if  not  a  misspelled  form  of 
the  same,  or  as  meaning  "niun^"^ — a  division  of 
opinion  which  may  be  traced,  it  seems  to  me,  to  the 
rendering,  on  the  one  hand,  of  c?  px  with  t^  by  the 
Pes.,  and,  on  the  other  hand,  of  px  with  si  and  i^n  by 
Jerome  and  the  Targ.  respectively.  However,  on 
closer  e.xamination,  the  rendering  of  C'.'.px?  with  'ISe  el 
eariv  by  the  LXX  points  in  the  direction  indicated 
above,  p.  36.  It  must  be  pointed  out  (i)  that  like  the 
Pes.,  Jerome,  and  the  Targ.,  the  LXX  did  not  read  the 
1  of  pxi;  (2)  that  the  question,  though  not  indicated 
in  the  Hebrew  text  by  any  interrogative  particle,  was 
introduced  by  the  Greek  translators  with  e* — there  are 
two  other  such  cases  in  the  following  Chap.  XXII; 
v.  7  gam  ^khidkhacm  jiltcn  bacnjiSai  =€t  aKrjdas  iraaiu 
vyuv  hoxreL  6  vlo<i  'lecraai,  and  v.  15,  liajjom  hahillollii 
lisol-lo  hhclohlm  =  rj  ar'^fiepov  ypyfiai  epcordv  avrip  8ia  toO 
6eov.-    Hence  from  the  t^  et  of  the  LXX  one  cannot 

'  Kcinig  in  his  article,  "Syntactischc  Excursc  zum  Alt.  Test." 
(in  Z.\T\V,  X\'III,  23q(T.)  discusses  these  two  views  at  length,  as  also 
Kloilcrmann's  emendation  of  W'in  to  w'i  (in  "Die  Biichcr 
Samuclis  und  dcr  Konige,"  1887.  ad  loc.)  and  Wellhausen's  emenda- 
tion to  r*'i  h'  (in  "  Dcr  Text  dcr  Bucher  Samuelis,"  187 1 .  <m/  loc.) 

» These  examples  show  that  K5nig  is  lar  afield  in  suggesting  that 
"Auf  die   Voraussetzung  cincs  solchcn    'in   (pi:.="DK)   kano    das 
a  in  rSt  ti  €<7-TH' dcr  LXX  .  .  .  hinweiscn"  («6.,  243)- 
327 


328  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

conclude,  as  Wellhausen  did,  and  following  him 
Budde  ^  and  Kittel  ^ — the  latter  reservedly — that  the 
original  text  read  -^>^^  nxn,  but  rather  that  the  LXX 
took  px  as  equivalent  to  nan.^ 

No  doubt  this  rendering  by  the  LXX  was  based  on  a 
reliable  tradition;  at  all  events  it  is  the  only  satisfac- 
tory explanation  of  this  much  debated  text.  Modem 
scholars  have  clearly  been  at  sea  regarding  this  r^<. 
Thus  Budde  in  Die  Biicher  Samuel  (in  Marti's 
HC.)  abandons  Wellhausen 's  emendation  r^'e  h"  in 
favor  of  Klostermann's  -ufe — no  doubt  because  of 
the  difficulty  of  explaining  how  r^'e  h"  could  have  got 
changed  to  lif'tn.  There  are,  however,  even  graver 
obstacles  in  the  way  of  accepting  Klostermann's 
emendation;  for  apart  from  the  fact  that  iif'ejaes-pd 
thahath  jad^kha   is    stylistically  objectionable,   ns-'N 

iSee  "The  Books  of  Samuel"  in  The  Sacred  Books  of  the  Old 
Test.,  ad  loc. 

2 See  "Biblia  Hebraica,"  ad  loc,  where  the  readings  w^'en  and 
r«'c  Ifijaes  are  proposed  as  alternatives. 

^  Einne  is  rendered  with  t'Se  I.  Sam.  XX,  22  hinne  hahesi(m), 
ISe  (A)  y  (rxfifl.  further  Gen.  XXVII,  6  hinnc  samati  T8e  lyio 
TjKOvcra,  and  Jud.  XIX,  24  hinne  bitti,  iBe  (iBov  A)  ■^  dvyaTrjp  /j.ov. 
An  example,  on  the  other  hand,  of  hinne  introducing  a  question 
spoken  with  emphasis,  is  I.  Sam.  XIV,  43,  hin^nl  'amilth,  "must  I 
die?  "  So  Kittel,  in  Kautzsch  ^,  rightly  translates  it.  The  fact  that 
Saul  in  reply  to  Jonathan's  confession  again  declares  {cf.  v.  39)  by  an 
oath,  that  Jonathan  must  die  (v.  44),  admits  of  no  other  interpreta- 
tion. This  declaration  would  have  no  sense  if  Jonathan  had  just  ex- 
pressed his  readiness  to  die.  In  Arabic  oj  (both  without  and  with 
the  interrogative  f )  occurs  quite  frequently  in  interrogative  sentences. 
When  used  to  introduce  a  complete  sentence  the  emphatic  particle 
commonly  adds  emphasis  to  the  sentence  as  a  whole,  i.  e.,  to  the 
predicate  rather  than  to  the  subject.  Accordingly  it  occurs  not  only 
with  the  indicative  but  with  the  various  other  modes  as  well.  An 
example  of  its  use  with  an  imperative  is  hen  habbaet-nd,  Is. 
LXIV,  8. 


SUPPLEMENTARY  NOTE  329 

nowhere  occurs  separated  by  an  intervening  word. 
Kittel  in  Kautzsch  ^  on  the  other  hand,  decides  for  tlic 
reading  'uf'en  (in  the  first  edition  he  accepted  Welihau- 
sen's  emendation  unreservedly),  but  since  en  JcS 
expresses  an  emphatic  negation  ^  its  use  in  an  inter- 
rogative sentence  is  excluded,  and  'aph  ^en  jacs-ru'^h 
U phlhaem,  Ps.  CXXXV,  17,  which  has  been  referred 
to  in  support  of  this  emendation,  proves  nothing,  as 
it  is  a  declarative  sentence. 

There  is  really  no  reason  why  the  occurrence  of  such 
an  emphatic  px  in  Hebrew  should  excite  surj^rise. 
Like  Aram.  fS,  «»,  and,  contrary  to  the  general 
view,  also  a  of  Aram.  P,  it  is  another  form  of 
P  which  latter,  in  accordance  with  a  suggestion 
made  by  Reckendorf  with  reference  to  the  relation  of 
Arab,  oj  to  .J/,-  is  not  to  be  considered  as  the 
younger,  apocopate,  but  rather  as  the  older,  non- 
sharpened  form  of  nin.  And  what  Fleischer  and 
Reckendorf  state  in  reference  to  the  conditional 
particle  Jj  and  J;,  o/,  "ecce,"  viz.,  that  they 
are  identical,  being  originally  deictic  particle  out  of 
which  the  use  as  conditional  particle  subsequently  de- 
veloped,^ holds  true  of  their  Hebrew  and  Aramaic 
equivalents:  these  may  be  used  either  as  deictic  or 

*  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  C^  J'X  cannot  be  considered  as 
equivalent  to  Aram.  »oi.  and  Arab.  »^' ;  as  a  matter  of  fact,  in 
Hebrew  px  is  used  as  equivalent  to  the  latter,  and  L**'  ii*?,  the  corrc- 
SfMjndlng  Hebrew  form  of  >^c>.  and  ^  does  not  in  all  probabilityo<iur 
at  all,  for  in  the  case  of  Job.  IX,  iz  ^  vh  {cf.  H.  Sam.  XVIII,  12) 
is  the  better  attested  reading.  • 

*See,  "Die  Syntactischcn  Vcrhaltnisse  des  Arabischcn,"  3S4f., 
Anm.  I. 

*Sce  Fleischer,  "Klcinere  Schriftcn,"  I,  122,  421,  also  ii3fl-; 
Reckendorf,  op  cit.,  3S3f.,  745,  Anm.  i;  sec  also  Caspari-Wrighl,  "  A 
Grammar  of  the  Arabic  Language,"  II,  16,  Rem.  a. 


33  o  THE  PROPHETS  OF  ISRAEL 

affirmative  particle,  or  as  conditional  particle.  Con- 
clusive proof  of  this  I  find  in  the  fact  that  also 
Hebrew  DK — with  deflection  of  the  primary  |  to  D^ 
is  both  conditional  and  emphatic  particle.^ 

*  For  the  complete  proof  of  the  above  assertion  there  is  no  place  in 
the  present  work.    It  will  be  published  separately. 


INDEX   OF    SCRIPTURE   PASSAGES   DIS- 
CUSSED  OR   INTERPRETED 

The  order  of   the   Biblical  Books  in   this  Index  is  that  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible 


GENESIS 

PACE 

I,  i6 40,  n.  I 

XX,  2 307f.,   n. 

XXVII,  6 328,  n.  3 

XL,  14 199,  n.   I 

XLII,  28 42,  n.  2 

EXODUS 

XI,  4 217,  n. 

XII,  12 217,  n. 

—  23 217,  n. 

XXIII,  6 215,  n.  I 

XXXII,  24 51 

—  29 107,  n. 

XXXIII,  5 217,  n. 

LEVITICUS 

XXIV,  14,  16 28 

NUMBERS 

XV,35f 28 

XVI,  18 40,  n.  I 

XXII,  6 97 

XXIII,  9 4 

XXXI,  7 282 


DEUTERONOMY 

PACE 

IV,  6 308,  n. 

VIII,  3 108,  n. 

XIII,  1 32 

—  2-6 34 

—  3.4 30 

—  10 28 

XIV,  24 35.  n.  I 

XVII,  7 28 

—  8-12 34 

—  16 246,  n.  1 

XVIII,  15-22 29flF.,  41,  44 

XXIII,  IS 217,  n. 

XXVII,  19 21S,  n.  I 

XXVIII,  43 252 

—  64 320 

XXIX,  3 155,  n.  I 

XXXIII 239 

—  9^ 34 


XXII, 


JOSHUA 


JUDGES 


V.  23... 
XIX,  24 


328, 


306 

n.  3 


331 


332 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 


I  SAMUEL 

PAGE 

IX,  6,  20 143,  n.  I 

X,  si.,  loff 143,  n.  I 

XIV,  41 317,  n.  I 

—  43 328,  n.  3 

XV,  31 no 

XIX,  20-24 143,  n.  I 

XX,  22 328,  n.  3 

XXI,  9 36,    327ff- 

XXII,  7,  IS 327 

XXIII,  19 41 

XXV,  8 288 

—  13 "o 

XXVI,  1 41 

—  19 32of. 

XXIX,  8 35,  n.  I 

II  SAMUEL 

HI,  35 97 

V,  6-10 229 

VI,  1 193 

VII,  s 231,  n.  2 

XII,  28 99,  n.  I 

XVIII,  12 329,  n.  I 

XIX,  14 97 

XX,  19 192 

XXIV 228,  n.  2 

I  KINGS 

1,37 214,  n.  4 

V,  I SI 

VIII,  27 i46f. 

X,  28 246,  n.  I 

XII,  21 193 

XIX 161,  n.  I,  326 

—  4 98 

XXII,  6ff 148 


II  KINGS 

PAGE 

III,  IS 143,  n-  I 

—  24 288 

XII,  19 238 

XIII,  7 238 

— 14-19 238,306 

XIV,  9-14 238 

—  25-27 238f. 

XVr,  3f 227,  n. 

XVII,  24-28 3o8f. 

—  24-32 229 

—  29-41 308,  n.  I 

XVIII,  4 297,   n. 

XIX-XX 295 

XIX,  5-7 292 

XXIII,  6f 227,    n. 

—  IS 229 

XXIV,  1,7 45,  n.  I 

ISAIAH 

I,  2-20 206,  n.  2 

—  3 236 

—  10 13,  n. 

—  10-18 296 

—  10-20 3I2f. 

—  11-17 32 

—  31 214,  n.  3 

II,  6-22.  .256,  260,  264,  n.  I,  326 

—  6 236 

HI,  13 49,  n-  I 

IV,  1 99,  n.  I 

V,  15-16 260, 326 

— 16 269 

—  19 153,286 

—  26 49,  n.  I 

V,  26-30 257,  26iff. 

VI 139,  142,  161, 

n.  2,  163,  25sff. 

—  3-8 270 

—  13 258,260 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 


333 


PAGE 
VII,  3-14,  16-21,  23-25.  ...    265 

—  4 269,293 

—  4ff 76 

—  9 269,  293,  294f.,  n. 

—  IS  and  22 265,  n.   i 

VII,  14-VIII,  8 152 

Vin,  if 173,  266,  n.  2 

—  1-8,  H-18 265 

—  3 142 

—  9-10 265,  n.  2 

II lOI 

—  i2f 269 

—  14 231 

—  16-1S.  .  .  .169,  173,  294,  n.  2 

—  17 236 

IX,  1-6 270 

rX,  7-X,  4 256ff.,  26iff. 

—  20 252 

X,  5-34 259,293 

X,  S-19 272,  273f.,  28sfiF. 

—  18 120,  n.  2 

20 259,  272flF. 

—  21-23 259ff.,  273 

24-27 259,  272fif. 

—  27C-34 273,275 

XIV,  4ff 58 

24-27 272ff.,  293 

—  28-32 273,  276flF.,  293 

XVII,  5f 2S7f. 

—  7f 260,326 

XVII,  12-XVIII,  6... 273, 

278fif.,  293 

XIX,  23a 273.  n.  I 

XX,  2f 142 

XXI,  i-io 288 

XXII,  1-14 287ff. 

—  6 288,  290,  n.  I 

XXIV.  10 182,  n.  2,  276 

XXVIII,  1-4,7-22 265f. 

—  1,3 287,  n.  I 


PACE 

XXVIII,  2 100,  n.  I 

—  9f 29 

—  16 294,  n.  2 

—  16,  17 269f. 

—  19 ii3f..3o8,  n. 

XXIX,  1-4,     sc-6,     9-14 
206,  n.  2,  265f.,  28of.,  282, 

293^- 

—  5  a-b,  7-8 273,  278, 

28off.,  293 

—  9-14 296 

—  II-I2 267 

—  13-14 310 

—  17-24 283,  n.  I 

XXX,  1-17 76,  266 

—  1 24s 

—  1-7,  16 282 

—  8 169,173 

—  8-11 266f. 

—  9-12 296 

—  lof 29 

—  15 153 

—  i5f 269,  284,  293 

—  16 245 

—  18-33 283 

XXXI,  1-4 266,    282f. 

—  1 24S 

XXXI,  5-9.  .273,  278,  282, 

2835.,  291,  293 

—  6 236 

XXXII,  3 155,  n-    » 

XXXVI I-XXXIX 295 

XXXVII,  2ff 78 

—  S-7 aga 

—  22ff 58 

—  31..  ---'8.  n.  I 
XL,  1-8  154 

—  4.  .  i<y),  n.  2 

—  13,  ii8,  n.  1 
XLII,  7,  kSI 155,  D.   I 


334 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 


PAGE 

XLII,  13 217,    n. 

XLIII,8 155 

XLV,  8 156 

—  20 252 

XLVI,  13. 51 

XLVII,  12 204 

XLVIII,  14 252 

LVII,  15 318 

LXIII,  7 199,  n.  I 

LXIV,  8 328,  n.  3 

JEREML\H 

I,  i-io,  15-19 139,  142 

—  5 115 

—  8,  17-19 10 

—  II 39 

—  11-14 142 

—  18 102 

II,  4,  14,  26,  31 236 

—  II 103,  n.  4,  189,  n.  I 

III,  6-IV,  2 195,  n.  I 

III,  17,  IV,  2 104 

IV,  3-31 179,    i95ff- 

—  3f 206,  n.  2 

—  7 120,  n.  2 

—  10 190 

—  14 214,  n.  3 

—  19-21 i6f. 

—  31 194 

V,  12-14,  31 190 

—  21 15s,  n.  I 

VI 203 

—  II 100,  n.  2 

VII,  1-15,   21-26 1  iff., 

2iff.,  32,  35 

—  16-20,  27- VIII,  3 2lff. 

—  28 35,  n.  I 

vm,  4 22 

-8 35 


PAGE 

vin,  16, 18,  IX,  I i6f. 

IX,  22-23 iSf-,   io3ff- 

—  23 145,  n.  2 

X,  23-24 io3ff. 

XI,  18-XII,  3a,  5-6..8iff., 

84ff.,  89f.,  ii5ff. 
XI,  2off.,  XII,  3b 112 

XI,  21 29 

XII,  i-3a .17!.,   109 

—  3b,  4....ii5ff.,   i87ff.,   iSgf. 

—  6 14 

—  12 49,  n. 

XIII,  iff 142 

XIII,  15-27 i79ff-,  191 

—  20-27 191 

XIV,  1-XV,  9 179,  i84ff. 

XIV,  1-9 116 

—  17 276 

—  18 i6f.,  ii3f. 

XV,  10,  15-21 14,  44f., 

8if.,  89,  95ff.,  no 

—  12-14 95f- 

—  15 112 

—  16 17 

—  i7f i6f. 

XVI,  1-9 i6f.,  102 

—  10-18,  20-21 103 

XVI,  19 i9f.,  io3ff. 

XVII,  1-4 96 

XVII,   5-10,   14-18... i5f., 

igf.,  8if.,  89f.,  io3ff. 

—  11-13 103,  n-  2 

—  IS 153 

XVII,  19-27 32,  49ff. 

XVIII,  1-12 2o8ff. 

—  18 35 

XVIII,  18-20 8if.,  86 

—  20 112 

—  21-23 112 

XDC 86f. 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 


335 


PAGE 

XIX,  I,  2,  3a 22,  n.  I 

XX,  :-6 86f. 

—  1-3 16 

XX,  7-11,  13 8iff.,  87, 

89!.,  i2iff.,  129,  n. 

—  7-9 9,  icx),  n.  I,  no 

—  9 149 

—  10 14,  86 

—  iia 17 

—  12 1 26 

XX,  14-1S.  .Sif.,  89,  112,  i27fT. 
XXI 55,66 

—  1-3 66f.,  68f. 

—  la 76 

—  4-14 . .  54f.,  6off.,  69f.,  72£F.,  84 

—  12 214,  n.  3,  284!. 

XXII,  isf 14s,  n.   2 

—  18 74 

XXIII,  9-40 I44ff-,   15s 

—  16-22 31 

—  23 318 

XXV 38,  46ff.,  207 

—  31 208,  n.  I 

XXVI 2  2f.,   2411.,  34ff.,   70 

—  4-5 13,  n. 

XXVII 6i,n.,7Sf.,n.3 

—  iff 142 

XXVIII 78f.,  n.  3 

—  i-ii 31.  n.  I 

—  8,  9,  12-16 3of. 

XXIX,  26 57,    87 

XXX,  2f 169,  173 

XXXI,  7 219 

—  8 49,  n- 

—  29-30 322f. 

—  31-34..  1311.,  23f.,  3i8f.,  323 

XXXII,  1-15 19,  71,  173 

—  3b-5 55,   6ofI.,   7iff.,   76 

—  10 134 

—  i6ff.,  19 109,  n.  I 


PAGE 

XXXIV,  1-3   ...55,  6off.,   70(1. 

—  4-6 74 

—  7 74,    76 

XXXIV,  8-22 52f.,  55, 

05,  76f. 
XXXV 44f. 

—  I,  II 45 

XXXVI 15,  3Sff.,  46f.,  167 

—  2 39,  144, 

168 

—  3,  7 204f. 

—  27-32 i67f.,    173 

—  28,  29 134 

—  32 133 

XXXVII,  if 77f- 

—  3,  7a 65f.,    67f. 

—  4 77 

—  5 77 

—  7b-io 53,   76f. 

—  11-16 16,  n.   I,  65 

—  11-21 53,    71 

XXXVII,  17-21 55f.,    62ff. 

—  19 53f-,    n- 

—  21 77 

XXXVIII,  1-13 53ff.,  69ff. 

—  1-4 68 

—  1-6 27 

—  9 145,  n-  I 

XXXVIII,  14-27 ssff. 

XXXIX,  17 86 

XLV 207f. 

—  S 49,  n. 

XLVI-LI 46,  n. 

XLVI,  2-12 46f.,  n. 

XLVIII,  4,  17 276 

XLIX,  19 120,  n.  2 

L-LI 79,  n.,  2S8,  n.  i 

L,  44 120,  n.  2 

LI,  8 20s 

LI,  59-64 79,  o- 


33^ 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 


EZEKIEL 

PAGE 
1 163 

Iff 163 

III,  14 100,  n.  I 

IV,  12 321 

V,  IS,  17 74,   n.   I 

VII,  26f 113 

Vlllff 163 

XII,  2 155,  n. 

—  22 35,  n.  I 

XXI,  22,  37 74,  n.  I 

XXIII,  34 74,  n.  I 

XXVI,  5,  14 74,  n.  i 

XXVIII,  10 74,  n.  I 

XXX,  12 74,  n.  I 

XXXIV,  24 74,  n.  I 

XXXVII,  II.... 35,  n.  1,114,  n. 
XL-XLVIII 32 

HOSEA 

I-III 237,    24off.,    25lf. 

I,  3 253 

—  4f 125 

■ —  4,  6,  9 142 

II,  1-3 25lff. 

—  4f 240 

—  9 24of.,    243 

—  16-25 240!.,  242, 

243,  244,  250 

2lf 250,      318 

III 241 

—  4 321 

—  4-S 25iff. 

IV,  if 249 

—  8,  12 317 

—  17 246 

V,  i-i5a 247f. 

—  4 249 


PAGE 

V,4-^ 317 

—  6 206 

—  13 246 

—  14 186,  n.  I 

V,  isb-VI,  3 24of.,    247ff. 

VI,  3 318 

—  4ff 250 

—  6 32,310 

VII,  II i5if.,  245 

—  I  iff 246 

—  14 316 

\T;II,  4 245,  n.  I 

—  4ff 246 

—  8 210 

—  9 246 

—  II 316 

—  11-13 32 

—  13 152,245 

IX,  3-5 152,  32of. 

—  3,  6 24s 

—  7! 29 

—  10 23sf. 

X,  I 316 

—  si;  si 246 

—  i2f .  . 240,  n.  I 

—  i3f 245,  n.  I,  246 

XI,  If 237 

—  2 246 

—  5 152,24s 

—  7-1 1 240,  n.  2 

xn,  2 246 

XIII,  2 246 

XIV,  2-9 240,  244ff. 

—  10 244,  n.  I 


JOEL 

III,  I 49,  n. 

IV,  16 227ff, 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES  337 

AMOS  PAGE 

PAGE        VI,  II 23of.,   234,  236 

I-VI 224,23s         —12 32s 

I i2f.,  n.      —13 234,239 

I-II 307f-      —14 234,  n. 

I,  2 2Ilf.,    227ff.,    235,   30s         VII,  1-9 222ff. 

II,  4f 23iff.      —  1-6 142,  n.  I 

—  6 215,  n.  I      —  7-9 139,    233 

—  9 228,  n.  I      —9 233!. 

—  6-16 232!,      — 10-17 222 

111,1-8 232      — 12-17 8 

—  I 230      —  i4f 143.  230 

—  2 230,  232!.,  n.  2,307!.      —  IS 233!. 

—  8 8      VIII,  1-2,  3,  10,  13-14 224!. 

—  8,  9 222      —  1-2 142,  222,  233 

III,  9-IV,  3 232,234      —  4-8a 222,    232 

—  9f 324      —4 107,  n.  3 

—  9^.  13 1 2f.,  n.      —  4-7 325 

—  12 258      —  11-12 ii3f.,  224,  n.  2,303 

^^^  I 324      —  i3f 235,236 

IV,  4-V,  27 23s,  236      —  14 230 

IV,  4-12 206,23s  IX,   1-4.  ..  .142,  212,  224/., 

—  4-1 1 223  235,  293 

—  4 230      —  7 233,  3o6f.,  3o8n. 

—  4f 3"       IX,  8b-is 212,  n. 

V,  1-17 2i2ff.,  23s      —  12 99,  n. 


MICAH 


—  1-2 304f. 

—  4,5 230 

—  6 234  I-III 297 

—  14-15 312  IV-VII 297 

—  15b 234,    239  1,10-16 27s 

V,  18-27 23s  III,  I,  8f.,  10 236 

—  iSfif 32s  —5-8 i43f- 

—  18 230  — 6f ii3f. 

—  21-25 32  — 9-11 i86f. 

—  21-24 3iif-  V,  6-7 219 

VI 234  VI,  6-8. . .  .32,  3iof.,  3i7f.,  323 


1-6 219 

1 230.  234 

6 234.    239      1,2-11 7 


HAGGAI 
236,324      11,3-5,11-14 7 


338 


INDEX   OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES 


ZACHARIAH 

PAGE 
I,  7-VI,  8 163 

I,  12 7 

II,  13,  IS,  III,  2 7 

IV,  6-10 7 

—  6 3,7 

VI,  IS 7 

VTII,  3-9,  10,  13,  19 7 

X,  lof 273,  n.  I 

XIV,  12 282 

PSALMS 

VI,  3f 123,  n.  2 

VII,  4-6 97,  n. 

XV,  4 186,  n.  I 

XXXI,  II I2S,  n.  2 

XXXV,  9f 123,  n.  2 

—  IS 14,  n-  4 

XXXVIII,  18 14,  n.  4 

XLIV,  10 217,  n. 

LI 3^5 

LX,  12 217,  n. 

LXXI,  20 118,  n.  I 

LXXIII,  23 120 

—  28 147 

LXXVII,  12 199,  n.  I 

LXXXIII,  9 273,  n.  I 

LXXXV,   12 156 

CIV,  21 107,  n.  3 

CXXVI,  2 2i4f.,  n.  4 

CXXX 31S 

CXXXV,  17 329 

CXXXVII,  8 202,  n.  2 

PROVERBS 

I,  19 188 

III,  12 243 

—  21 51 


PAGE 
V,  18 no,  n.  2 

IX,  1 104,  n.  I 

XXIV,  24 199,  n.  I 

XXV,  23 100,  n.  2 

JOB 

ni,  20 181,    n. 

IV,  12-16 140 

VL,  is-20 100,  n.  3 

VII,  17 no 

VIII,  13 188 

—  18 181,  n.  I 

rX,  33 329,  n.  I 

X,  20 no 

XV,  8 no 

XVII,  6 199,  n-   I 

XVIII,  12 14,  n.  4 

XEK,  29 284,  n. 

XXXI 97,  n. 

XXX\r[I,  4 212,  n. 

LAMENTATIONS 
m,  3S 215,  n.  I 

ECCLESIASTES 
VIII,  II 144,  n- 

ESTHER 
vn,  5 144,  n. 

DANIEL 

VIII,  8 276 

XI,  8 252 


INDEX  OF  SCRIPTURE  PASSAGES  339 

EZR^\  JESUS  BEN  SIRACH 

PAGE  PAGE 

VI,  22 273,  n.  I       VIII,  10 214,  n.3 

XX,  6 106,  n.  a 

NEHEMIAH 

IV.4 125,  n.  2  MATTHEW 

™'^5- 49ff.      ^^^^ ,^^ 

XXIV,  I II,  n.  2 

I  CHRONICLES 

XII,  1 4r  MARK 

XVII,  4 231,11.    2 

XIX,  10 193       XIII,  I II,  n.  2 

XXI-XXII,  I 228,  n.  2 

II  CHRONICLES  THE  ACTS 

I,  16 246,  n.  I  n,  4 149,   n- 

VI,  18 i46f.  X,  46 149,    n- 

XX,  4 252  XIX,  6 149,  n. 

XXVIII,  15 125,  n.  2 

—  17,   18 262f. 

—  18 276  I  CORINTHIANS 

XXXII,  4 252 

_  2-5,  30 290      XIV,  2,  4,  i3f.,  18,  27.  .149,     n. 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


Ahaz,  269,  276 
Ahikam,  28,  37f.,  40 
Alexander,  victory  at  Issos  of, 

277;  figurative  description  of, 

277f. 
.\maziah,  priest  of  Beth-El,  8, 

143 

Amenophis   IV,   religious   refor- 
mation of,  i58f.,  n. 

Amos: 

inaugurates  literary  or  spirit- 
ual prophecy,  5,  155,  175; 
he  home- village  and  -state,  5, 
8,  302;  place  of  his  preachmg, 
8,  223,  234,  237,  304;  season 
of  the  year,  172,  n.  2,  304;  ex- 
pelled from  the  country,  8, 
29;  his  writings,  contrasted 
with  Jeremiah's,  211;  domi- 
nant note  of,  21  if.;  style,  22if.; 
relation  of,  to  oral  preach- 
ing, 221,  224;  original  order, 
structure,  and  theme  of  V,  i- 
17,  2i3ff.;  text-disturbances, 
extent  and  origin  of,  222;  vi- 
sions, so-called,  VII,  1-6,  pur- 
port of,  2  23f.;  relation  to  IV, 
6-1 1,  223f.;  vision,  the,  VII, 
7-9,  222ff.,  cf.  139;  \'isions,  the, 
VIII,  1-2,  IX,  1-4,  223,  224f., 
cf.  142;  social  and  religious 
conditions  in  both  kingdoms, 
subject  of  his  preaching,  225fl., 
cf.  2i8f.,  223;  authenticity  of 


I,  2,  227fr.;  origin  of  2a,  228; 
popularnotion associated  with, 
229;  his  paradoxical  applica- 
tion of,  229f.;  other  examples 
of  the  kind,  230,  cf.  218;  de- 
nounces superiority  of  Zion 
even  as  sanctity  of  other 
YHWH-sanctuaries,  229f., 
235f.;  "Israel,"  etc.,  "Jacob," 
etc.,  usage  of  terms  in  Amos, 
232f.,  236;  "House  of  Isaac," 
"High-places  of  Isaac,"  mean- 
ing of,  233f.;  incentive  to  his 
preaching,  234,  238f.,  304;  his 
view  of  Jeroboam  II's  vic- 
tories, 23Sf.,  323  ;5«Vri/Aj55c/>A, 
meaning  of,  219,  239;  inter- 
polations: II,  4f.,  23ifr.;  IX, 
8b-is,  212,  n.  i;  his  person- 
ality, contrasted  with  Jere- 
miah's, 302f.;  misjudged  by 
critics,  211,  303f.;  his  God- 
conception  vs.  that  of  his 
times,  305(1.;  denies  Israel's 
monopoly  of  YHWH'S  favor, 
306,  3o8n.;  his  interpretation 
of  Israel's  deliverance  from 
Egypt.  307f-;  his  view  of 
worship,  the  religious  advance 
marked  by,  2i8f.,  223,  226, 
3o8f.,  311,  3«3ff-;  his  view- 
point regarding  material  pros- 
perity, 323(1.;  sec  Inspiration 
Asdod,  conquest  of,  89,  295,  n.  3 


34' 


342 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


Assur,  meaning  of  name,  in  post- 
exilic  literature,  273,  n.  i 
Astarte  (Ashera)  worship,  273,  n. 

Baruch,  15,  s&S.,  172,  2o7f. 
Beth-El,    after    destruction    of 

Samaria,  222 
"Blessing    of    Moses"     (Deut. 

XXXIII),  238f. 

Centralization  of  the  cult,  35,  229 
Chaldaeans,  withdrawal  of,  from 

Jerusalem,  52;  return  of,  53f., 

63 
Children,  sacrificing  of,  227,  n. 
Civil  war,  the,  89,  262,  264 
Communion  (converse)  with  God, 

see  Inspiration 
Criminal  court,  24 
Curse,  behef  in  efficacy  of,  96f. 

David,  3f.;  conquest  of  the  Jebu- 
site  stronghold  by,  228 

Deutero-Isaiah,  6f.,  9,  174,  243; 
sec  Inspiration 

Deuteronomic  law  pertaining  to 
false  prophet,  29ff. 

Deuteronomic  Law,  promulga- 
tion of,  2s,  35 

Discrepancy,  seeming,  between 
Jer.  XXXVI,  i  and  v.  9,  40, 
n-  3 

Divination,  forms  of,  i38f.,  i48f.; 
practised  by  the  older  proph- 
ets, 143 

Divine  call,  see  Inspiration 

Downfall  of  the  nation,  effect  of, 
on  the  people,  ii3f.,  303 

Dur-ilu,  battle  at,  277 

Ebed-Melech,  54,  86 

Edom,  attack  of,  on  Judah,  26  2f. 


Egypt,  trade  in  horses  by,  245f. 

Elijah,  160 

Elisha,  143,  n.;  his  concern  at  the 

nation's  defeat  by  Syria,  238, 

306 
"Ends  of  the  earth,"  from  the, 

49,  n.,  265 
Era,  autumnal,  vernal,  40,  n.  3 
Ethical  Monotheism,  326 
Ezekiel,  32,  i62f.,  174 

Fatalism,  sidereal,  of  antiquity, 
iS9f.,  n. 

"Guilt  of  Samaria,"  the,  230 

Hananiah,   denounced  by  Jere- 
miah, 3of. 

Hezekiah,  290,  295,  297,  n. 

Hosea : 

subject  of  the  Northern  King- 
dom, 237;  his  preaching  ad- 
dressed to  whole  nation,  236f., 
cf.  226f.,  n.;  "Israel,"  "Beth- 
Israel,"  etc.,  his  usage  of  the 
terms,  236;  his  future  hope, 
various  expositions  of,  gen- 
lune,  24of.,  243,  246f.,  247f., 
250;  outcome  of  his  God- 
conception,  24if.,  247;  experi- 
ence in  his  life  that  led  to  the 
latter,  80,  24 if.;  figure  of  the 
marital  relationship,  247;  Love 
and  Law  not  antitheses,  242f.; 
the  two-fold  aspect  from  which 
he  considers  the  future  resto- 
ration, 244,  250;  "ride  on 
horses,"  origin  of  phrase,  245f.; 
the  spiritual  truth  revealed  in 
VI,  3,  249,  25of.;  knowledge  of 
God,  249f.,  318;  original  order 
of  I-III,   251;  original  place         I 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


343 


of  IT,  1-3,  25iff.;  "Great  shall 
be  the  day  of  Jezreel,"  253; 
influence  on  Isaiah,  245;  his 
view  of  worship,  310,  3i5fT., 
f/.  249f.;  his  idea  of  prayer, 
^16;  see  Inspiration 

Immanence  of  God,  sec  Inspira- 
tion and  Jeremiah 

Inspiration,  prophetic: 

distinct  from  ecstasy  or  man- 
tic  possession,  i36fiF.,  143,  151, 
i6if.,  n.  2;  consecration-vi- 
sions, spiritual  experience  de- 
scribed in,  139;  revelation  and 
attendant  emotions,  account 
of,  in  Is.  Viand  Job  IV,  12-16, 
i39f.;  modem  analogies,  i4ofi'.; 
other  visions,  psychological 
explanation  of,  142;  inspira- 
tion and  revelation  as  under- 
stood by  the  great  prophets, 
i43fT.;  by  Amos,  143,  cf.  8;  by 
Micah,  i43f.;  by  Jeremiah, 
144(1.;  true  prophet,  mark  of, 
145;  converse  with  God,  me- 
dium of,  i45f.;  immanence  of 
God,  i46f.;  true  revelation, 
evidences  and  workings  of, 
contrasted  with  mistaken  no- 
tion of,  148(1.,  cf.  g;  the  revela- 
tion of  God  universal,  isof., 
cf.  I2f.,  n.;  in.spircd  prophecy 
vs.  vaticination,  15  iff.;  es- 
sence of,  152(1.,  cf.  3of.;  Deu- 
tero-Isaiah's  conception  of  in- 
spiration and  revelation,  i54f  ; 
conception  of  inspiration  the 
governing  principle  of  spiritual 
prophecy,  155,  i6of.;  the  re- 
ligious advance  marked  there- 


by, iSS^;  322f.;  genius,  is6f.; 
religious  views  prior  to  liter- 
ary prophecy,  in  Israel,  I57f.; 
among  the  Oriental  nations, 
isSf.;  conditions  in  the  ancient 
world  at  the  time  of  the  proph- 
ets' preaching,  i5of.;  story  of 
Klijah  on  Mt.  Horcb  (I  Ki. 
XIX),  growth  and  composi- 
tion of,  161,  n.  i;  Ezckiel's 
idea  of  revelation,  162;  his 
writings  and  visions,  character 
of,  163;  Zachariah's  writings 
and  visions,  character  of,  163 
Isaiah: 

compared  with  Jeremiah,  g; 
events  marking  the  various 
periods  of  his  preaching,  89; 
the  consecration-vision,  139, 
161,  n.  2,  163;  not  colored  by 
his  later  experience,  256f.; 
starts  out  with  a  clear  vision 
of  the  situation,  255f.;  the 
destruction  is  to  be  comjilcte, 
25 yf.;  the  idea  e.xpresscd  by 
the  comparison  in  VI,  13, 
2S7f.;  the  hope  (.•\;)resscd  by 
hisson'sname,67;*'ar  yashiibh, 
258f.;  the  prophecy  explaining 
the  name,  259(1.;  "Va'akob," 
usage  of  term,  in  his  older 
prophecies,  260,  261;  his  de- 
scription of  the  Day  of  VHWH 
(II,  (y-22),  comjKjncnt  j>artsof, 
260,  n.  2;  the  idea  developed 
in,  260,  263,  264,  n.  I,  326;  the 
prophecy,  IX,  7(1.,  addrcjwcd 
to  Israel  and  Judah  alike, 
26of.;  conditions  and  reverses 
described  in,  2ft .'f.;  the  idc-a  de- 
veloped in,  263(1.;  his  view  of 


344 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


the  situation  unchanged  in 
the  following  periods,  2655.; 
exerts  no  influence  on  the  peo- 
ple or  state,  266f.;  no  states- 
man, 268f.;  his  basic  views — 
faith  and  holiness,  2695.,  291, 
293,  294f.,  n.,  296,  cf.  263, 
322;  his  idea  of  progress,  270; 
no  discrepancy  in  his  prophe- 
cies, 272ff.;  his  attitude  in  the 
crisis  of  the  year  701,  282ff., 
287,  292;  his  view  of  the  As- 
syrian world-power,  2855.,  cf. 
271;  denounces  the  belief  in 
the  inviolable  sanctity  of  Zion, 
28of.,  293f.;  stood  aloof  from 
political  life  to  the  end,  291, 
292f.,  294ff.;  "Vale  of  Vision," 
the,  (XXII,  5),  explanation  of, 
289f.;  his  view  of  worship, 
293f.,  296,  310,  3iif.,  316,  322; 
see  Inspiration,  and  Prophetic 
messages,  preservation  of 
"Israel,"  "Beth-Israel,"  usage 
of  terms  in  Hexateuch  and 
historic  literature,  236;  after 
the  destruction  of  Samaria,  236 

"Jacob,"  "Beth  Ya'akob,"  us- 
age of  terms,  after  destruction 
of  Samaria,  236 

Jehoachaz,  defeat  of,  by  SjTia, 
238f. 

Jehojada,  priest,  87 

Jehojakim,  attitude  of  to  Jere- 
miah, 4if.,  43f.;  recognition  of 
Nebuchadrezzar's  suzerainty 
by,  45,  n. 

Jehojachin,  61,  n.,  87,  179 

Jeremiah: 
greatest  exponent  of  the  faith 


of  the  prophets,  gf.,  i5f.,  i7fif., 
1 24, 1 68f . ;  the  Temple-sermon ,  | 

the  beUefs  denounced  in,  the 
positive  \news  expressed  in, 
I  iff.,  23,  35,  309f.;  critical 
analysis  of,  2  iff.;  persecution 
resulting  from,  i3f.,  21,  43ff., 
84f.,  96f.;  condemned  to  death, 
24ff.,  85;  helped  into  hiding 
by  Ahikam,  37ff.;  writing 
down  of  his  prophecies,  read- 
ing of  by  Baruch,  15,  38f.; 
occasion  of,  reason  for,  15, 
4of.,  46ff.,  172,  207;  scroll 
burned  by  Jehojakim,  15; 
motive  of  king's  action,  4iff.; 
attitude  of  Micajah  b.  Gemar- 
jah  to  reading,  38,  n.;  of  the 
Sarlm,  38,  n.,4iff.;  date  of,  40; 
flogged  by  Pashhur,  16,  n., 
86f.;  persecution  renewed,  14, 
52ff.,  84,  85f.,  ii7f.;  flogged 
and  imprisoned  in  a  dungeon 
by  the  Sarim,  16,  53;  prophecy 
that  provoked  them,  52f.,  65f.,  | 

76f.,  summoned  by  Zedekiah  i 

for  interview,  S3f.,  62ff.;  com- 
mutation of  sentence,  53,  64;  j 
thrown  into  a  miry  cistern,  27,          j 
54;  rescued  by  Ebed-Melech,         ' 
54f.,  86;  the  utterance  which 
gave  offence,  53!.,  6of.,  62,  66, 
68,   69ff.,   84,    284f.;   authen- 
ticity of  wrongly  questioned, 
75;     legendary    accounts    of 
Jeremiah,  s6ff.,  67ff.;  origin  of, 
62,  78;  imhistoric  conception 
of  Jeremiah  due  to,  78f.,  cf. 
61;  his  mental  suffering,  i6f., 
58,  99ff.,  inf.,  i8of.,  191,  19s, 
I  ggf.;  conflict  of  feelings,  202f.; 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


345 


prayed  for  suspension  of  the 
doom,  112;  effect  of  persecu- 
tion on  his  inner  life,  17,  Sof., 
90,  99;  his  confessions,  record 
of  his  spiritual  experience,  9, 
10,  i5f.,  lyi.,  19,  21,  45,  81, 

89,  90,  99ff.,  ii4f.,  117,  119, 
i22f.,  124,  126,  133;  date  of, 
9,  n.  I,  14,  IS,  19,  44f.,  Siff., 

90,  97,  104,  123,  126,  128; 
present  order  of,  81,  86f., 
i28f.;  literary  character  of, 
90;  his  view  of  worship,  iiff., 
309f.,  316,  318,  322;  divine 
authority  of  the  moral  law, 
I2f.,  n.  3,  23;  immanence  of 
God,  i46f.,  318;  absolute  de- 
pendence of  man  on  God,  109, 
114;  problem  of  suflering,  his 
solution  of,  iigf.,  121;  retri- 
bution, spiritual,  109;  moral 
freedom  and  individual  re- 
sponsibility, 32  2f.;  his  future 
hope,  13,  n.,  i9f.,  io3f.,  115, 
3i8f.,  323;  date  of  purchase  of 
property  from  Hanamel,  71; 
nothing  eschatological  about 
Jer.  IV,  23ff.,  201;  authorship 
of  the  oracles  against  the  na- 
tions, 46f.,  n.,  79,  n.,  208,  n.  i; 
see  Inspiration,  and  Prophetic 
Messages,  preservation  of 

Jeroboam  II,  victories  of, 
238f. 

Jerusalem  and  its  Temple,  in- 
violable sanctity  of,  see  Zion- 
Jerusalem 

Joash,  implores  Elisha's  blessing, 
238 

Judah,  alliance  of  with  Egypt, 
89,  169,  266,  269 


Karkcmish,  battle  at,  15,  45,  n. 
Kingdom  of  God,  6,   igi.,   154, 
260,  326,  f/.  156 

"Lebanon,"  the,  descriptive  use 
of,  27s 

Messianic  hojx?,  characteristic 
features  of,  in  postcxilic  times, 
271,  274 

Micah,  35,  113,  i86f.;  his  view  of 
the  doom,  297;  his  view  of 
worship,  the  religious  advance 
marked  by,  3iof.,  3i7f.,  322; 
sec  Inspiration 

Micajah  b.  Jimlah,  160 

Nathan,  160 

Nebuchadrezzar,  first  appear- 
ance in  Judah,  45 

Oath,  see  Curse 
Opliacl  (Acropolis),  73,  n. 
Oracle,    method    of    consulting, 
317,  n.  I 

Pashhur,  16,  n.  86f. 

Penitential  Psalms,  Biblical,  con- 
trasted with  Babylonian,  315 

Pharao  Nccho,  song  of  derision 
at  defeat  of,  47,  n. 

Philistines,  attack  of,  on  Judah, 
263,  276 

Philo,  view  of  revelation  of,  138, 
153.  162 

Pbto,  view  of  revelation  of,  138, 
153,  156,  162 

Prophetic  messages,  preserva- 
tion of,  due  to  [jfophcts'  own 
initiative,  i67f.,  i6g;  motive 
by  which  propbeUt  were  ac* 


346 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


tuated,  i68fF.,  175,  266;  cur- 
rent views  on  the  question  not 
substantiated,  lyoff.,  cf.  ?>^i.^, 
Jeremiah's  object  in  having 
his  past  prophecies  rehearsed 
by  Baruch,  lysf.,  cf.  2045.; 
"literary  prophecy,"  appro- 
priate term,  i74f.;  contrast 
between  older  and  literary 
prophets,  i75f. 

Prophetic  preaching,  vital  factor 
of,  5ff.,  124,  i68ff.,  17s,  177, 
cf.  176 

Prophetic  writings,  relation  to 
oral  preaching,  87flF.,  221;  Ut- 
erary  character  of,  gof. 

Prophets,  literary,  circumstances 
marking  their  appearance,  5; 
attitude  of  their  contempora- 
ries to,  29,  57,  67,  174,  266f., 
296,  cf.  35;  of  later  ages,  36; 
distance  in  religious  views 
separating  them  from  the 
people,  177,  i86f.,  255,  296, 
305;  not  concerned  with  the 
poHtics  of  the  day,  6 if.,  see 
Isaiah;  cf.  136;  contrasted  with 
the  older  prophets,  175;  pro- 
fessional or  official,  the  repre- 
sentatives of  official  religion, 
29,  34,  i43»  197,  n.  i;  op- 
ponents of  the  literary  proph- 
ets, 29;  denoimced  by  the 
latter,  29,  3of.,  i43f. 

Prophet,  true  and  false,  accord- 
ing to  the  Deuteronomic  stand- 
ard, 32f.,  35,  44;  according  to 
literary  prophets'  standard, 
3of.,  i43ff. 

Queen  dowager,  rank  of,  179 


Rechabites,  160;  flight  of,  to 
Jerusalem,  45 

Religion,  character  and  purpose 
of,  in  ancient  Israel,  321; 
prophets'  conception  of,  322 

Retribution,  spiritual,  see  Jere- 
miah 

Revelation,  see  Inspiration 

Rigveda,  view  taken  of  sacrifices 
in  the,  314 


Sabbath-observance,  51 

Salmanassar  IV,  270,  272 

Samuel,  143,  n.  i 

Sargon,  27off.,  295,  n.  3 

Sennacherib,  27if.;  invasion  of 
Judah  by,  89,  254,  268,  291; 
blockade  of  Jerusalem,  sgof., 
295,  n.  3 

Seven,  the  number,  194,  n.  i 

Solomon,  3f. 

Stock  phrases,  228,  245f. 

Style,  BibUcal,  or  Oriental,  fun- 
damental trait  of,  37,  9iff.; 
examples  of  this  style  in  Occi- 
dental hterature,  93ff.;  illus- 
trations of,  in  prophetic  litera- 
ture, 37,  99,  100,  115,  117,  119, 
182,  191,  196 

Syro-Ephraimitic  campaign,  89, 
169,  266,  269 

Talmud,  view  taken  of  sacrifices 
in  the,  3i4f. 

Text-omissions,  method  of  copy- 
ists in  dealing  with,  ii6f.,  n.  2, 
260,  n.  2,  261,  n.  I,  288f. 

Tiglath-Pileser  III,  2  7off.;  in- 
troduces system  of  transplan- 
tation, 272 


INDEX  OF  SUBJECTS 


347 


Tongues,  Gift  of  (Speaking  with), 

i4Sf. 
"Torah    (revelation)    of    God," 

connotation  of,  i2f.,  n. 
Transcendence  of  God,  i46f.,  148 
Tribal  responsibility,  321  f. 

Urijah,  contemporary'  prophet  of 
Jeremiah,  27,  jbf.,  41,  170 

"Voice,  the  still  small,"  i6i,  n.  i, 
326 

Wadi  of  the  Araba,  the,  234,  n.  2 
"Word  of  God,"  connotation  of, 
I2f.,  n. 

YHWH,    preprophetic    concep- 
tion of,  114, 158, 189,  228,  238, 


305f.,  320;  His  worship,  Imal 
limitation  of,  32of. 

Zachariah,  3,  5,  6f.;  writings  of, 
6,  103,  174 

Zedckiah,  27,  S2ff.,  63f.,  72;  con- 
templated revolt  against  Baby- 
lon, 7Sf.,  n.  3;  legend  of  his 
journey  to  Babylon,  70,  n.  3; 
unhistoric  picture  of,  7Sf.,  cj. 
64 

Zedckiah  b.  Kanaanah,  148 

Zephaniah,  priest,  87 

Zion- Jerusalem,  inviolable  sanc- 
tity of,  35,  103,  n.  2,  197,  n.  2, 
293;  superiority  of,  to  the 
other    YIIWH-sancluaries, 

228f. 


GIL\IMMATICAL  AND  LEXTCOGRArillCAL 
OBSERVATIONS 


'abhar  b',  equivocal  as  to  inten- 
tion implied,  2i6f.,  n. 
Accusative  of  specification,  122, 

n.  I,  2i4f.,  n.  4 
'a/  l^'acraekh  app'kha  (Jer.  XV', 

15),  construction  of,  98 
'alii  mill  ha'araes  (Hos.  II,  2), 

252 
'aqobh  (Jer.  XVII,  9),  106,  n.  2 
'^laer  recitativum,  127,  n.  2 
'ajiir  Qer.  XXXVI,  5),  4of. 
As>'ndeton,  iSo,  n.  i,  193 
'ac  (Jer.  XI,  18),  denoting  conse- 
quence, 118 

basar  Qer.  XXV,  31,  XLV,  4), 
49,  n.  I,  208,  n.  I 

Circumstantial  clause,  127,  191, 
n.  I,  248 

Ellipsis,  14,  n.  3,  100,  n.  2  and  3, 
110,  120,  n.  2,  196,  n.  I,  199, 
n.  I,  214,  n.  3,  215 

'm  bahiir   Qer.   XV,  8),    i92f. 

Emphatic  indetennination,  107, 
n.  I,  284,  n.  I 

Emphatic  infinitive,   107,  n.   i, 


hitme,   in   sentence-ellipsis,    199, 

n.  I 
hodVani  (Jer.  XI,  18),  118 

Imperfect  of  reiterated  action, 
12,  n.  3,  18,  n.  2;  of  progressive 
duration,  154 

Impersonal  construction,  181, 
n.  I 

'm,  emphatic  particle,  36,  327ff. 

Infinitive  of  active  stems,  two- 
fold voice  of,  107,  n. 

"itlakh  (Jer.  XII,  3)  qualificativc, 
18,  n.  3 

jalm'cT  jii'ag,  meaning  and  origin 

of,  21  if.,  n. 
jhlah  (Am.  V,  6),  214,  n.  3 
Jussive  with  wa  consecutive,  54, 

n.,  145.  n-  I 

ken,  verbal  adjective,  214,  n.  4; 

expletive,  2i4f.,  n.  4 
ki,    consecutive,    in   a    negative 

sentence,  35,  n.  i 
kl,  introductory,  188,  199,  n.  i, 

214,  n.  I 


gara'  with  /*  pcrsonae,  110 
Generic  article,  231 

hazkirH  laggojim  (Jer.  IV,   16), 
199,  n.  I 


Idq'hlm  I'ldnam,  I48f. 

malllhlO>V\c.  Ill,  8),  144.  n. 
mall  (Eccl.  VIII,  11,  EsL  VII, 
S),  144,  n. 


349 


350 


GRAMMATICAL  OBSERVATIONS 


tnassd  (Jer.  XVII,  19-27,  Neh. 

XIII,  15-22),  so 
misnoe  (Jer.  XVII,  18),  iiof. 
mosa  s^phathai  (Jer.  XVII,  16), 

io7f.,  n. 

Nominal  sentence  expressing 
wish,  108 

Object  of  preceding  verb  con- 
strued with  following  verb, 
48,  n.  I,  145,  n.  I,  248,  cf.  190, 
n.  2 

Object,  implied,  construed  with 
following  verb,  186,  n.  i 

'orhoth,  188 

paen,    in    sentence-ellipsis,    214, 

n.  3 
palf'du  ael,  42 


Potential  participle,  26,  75,  77, 
io8f.,  182,  184,  202,  283,  n.  3 

raq  (Am.  Ill,  12),  intensive  force, 
307f.,  n. 

sahha  'al,  282 

Subject  of  preceding  sentence 
construed  as  object  with  verb 
of  following  sentence,  and 
■vice  versa,  51,  182,  n.  3,  205, 
n.  I,  cf.  125,  n.  4 

Suffix,  2nd  sing.,  impersonal 
construction  of,  199,  n.  2 

'illai,    denoting     a    conjectural 

case,  204f. 
'usmero'ce  ^alf're,  logi. 

Za'am  (Jer.  XV,  17),  100,  n.  2 
Zeugma,  144,  n. 


icHi«^ai^'  ID  DESK  i'ROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN    DEPARTAAENT 


my 

15- 


J/ 


This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or      'f' 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed.  _ 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall.         i^^ 


m^ 


5 1073  0  7    T 


OiUU.  r^' 


V 


l\Pi! 


■t 


3  73-lPW05-^S 
NOV  2  5  1979   - 


BEC  1-18.   NOV  1 ,,  1573 


JB 


CDM7MMEi77 


."2  9,h  ^h  ^2 


uSivER 


SITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  UBRARY 


